V»v* v^-v* v»v* 






V. •7X.« A 



.«>..•••.•* 



<* ***** 4& 1 



^/l 






* A 









F «*< 






V 



K 



•MS 



«. •• 



:: 



y .'^Waa '*«„ ^ - 



9* . 















& 1 






A V. ^a* <«F 



^ s*Sf£. m \^ :£tj£i %^j 



f • 



^ ^W •• 



.^*p« 



.v^. 









• L f\ 






*° .OSSir/^ ^ ^ 



-*©* 



% 








:> 



^\* 






















N *<*, 










,•0" »••* -■ *> 



- 



W 






t 1<2. 






...... V" >*"jate 









>.* rf^ 






>. >-,;■ 



to %/ .>^': %/ ;&& V 






^o 1 

qv a , • . . <* 



4» 
1 * •* «* 









.^>^ 






HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS 



WAYSIDE TRUTHS 



LIFE OF OUR LORD 



BY 

N: Cr BURT, D. D, 



i: 



PHILADELPHIA 

J. B. LIPPINCOTT & CO. 

1865. 



3W& 



Entered according to the Act of Congress, in the year 1865, by 

J. B. LIPPINCOTT & CO., 

In the Clerk's Office of the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. 



3 0/ /> ^ 



L 



The Li 
d)t- C 

WASHING 






\ 



PREFACE 



Two musical notes produce a higher effect when sounding in 
harmony, than when heard singly in succession. Two slightly 
different views of the same scene, blended in the stereoscope, 
give a single view far more life-like than that which either pre- 
sents when seen by itself. 

Thus two separated portions of Divine truth are sometimes 
found to be so remarkably related to each other, that being 
brought together, a far more striking, if not a wholly new im- 
pression is obtained. 

Such works as Paley's " JSbrce Paulince 1 '' and Blunt' s "Un- 
designed Coincidences of the Old and New Testaments," val- 
uable as they are for the special object of establishing the mi- 
nute truthfulness of the Sacred Writers, secure perhaps even a 
higher result, in incidentally eliciting the fuller and more vivid 
meanings of those portions of Scripture with which they deal. 

In pursuing the study of the Gospel records, the author has, 
from time to time, noted such passages as have been found to 
receive striking illustration from unexpected sources. The chief 
of these, with their illustrations, are herewith presented. Some- 
times, as will be seen, the illustration comes from outside the 
G-ospel history. Often the narrative in one of the gospels finds 
its complement in the parallel narrative of another of the gos- 



pels. Occasionally the immediate context, when well considered, 
is found to have an interpretative bearing not at first sight per- 
ceived. 

The passages illustrated being of considerable number, and 
coming from every part of the Evangelic narratives, and being 
moreover here arranged, as nearly as possible, in the order of 
historical occurrence, the book instead of proving to be a mere 
aggregation of disconnected teachings, may be found to present 
a tolerably complete outline of the Life and Ministry of our 
Lord. 

It may not be amiss to state that the first chapter, substan- 
tially as here given, was published some years since, under the 
author's initials, in one of the religious magazines. 

Although the Gospel records are receiving elaborate exposi- 
tion and defence from the most distinguished Sons of the Church, 
it is hoped that this humble effort will not be regarded as either 
wholly useless or presumptuous. 

Cincinnati, May, 1865. 



CONTENTS. 



I. 

PAGE 

The Visit of the Wise Men ; as direetly occasioned by Daniel's Prophecy 
of the Messiah 9 

II. 

The Baptism of Christ; as illustrated by His Transfiguration..... 16 

III. 

The Temptation in the Wilderness ; as illustrated by Christ's Eebuke 
of Peter 21 

IV. 

The Contempt of Nathanael for Nazareth, connected with the fact 
that he belonged to Cana of Galilee 28 

V. 
The Healing of the Paralytic and of the Infirm Man Compared 32 

VI. 

The Woman who was a Sinner, and Christ's Gracious Invitation 37 

VII. 

Sudden Outbreak of Pharisaic Hostility ; and its Immediate Occasion. 44 

VIII. 

Levi's Feast, in Several Kelations ; especially Christ's Representation 

of Himself as the Bridegroom 50 

. 1 * 5 



b CONTENTS. 

IX. 

PAGE 

The Disciples unexpectedly Compelled to Embark and cross the Lake : 
and the Reason for it 58 

X. 

Crisis in the History of Judas 64 

XL 

The Person who saw Men as Trees Walking not born blind 70 

XII. 

The Opening of a New Era in the Ministry of Christ 75 

XIII. 
The Transfiguration Occurring at Night 84 

XIV. 
The Transfiguration Scene Culminating in the Heavenly Voice 87 

XV. 

The Exclamation, "0 Faithless and Perverse Generation;" as uttered 
soon after the Transfiguration 90 

XVI. 

The Contentions of the Disciples among themselves; as always con- 
nected with Christ's Teachings concerning His Death 94 

XVII. 

Conduct of the Unbelieving Brethren of Jesus ; as seen on Two Occa- 
sions 100 

XVIII. 

The Allegory of the Good Shepherd; as connected with the Healing 
of the man born blind 106 

XIX. 

The Request, " Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father ;" by 
whom made, and why refused 110 



CONTENTS. 7 

XX. 

PAGE 

Christ "Beholding" the Young Ruler: as illustrated by His "turning 
and looking on Peter." 116 

XXI. 

Parable of the Laborers in the Vineyard; as connected with Previous 

Teachings 122 ^ 

XXII. 

Christ's Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem: The Ass and Her Colt 128 

XXIII. 
The Miracle and the Parable of the Barren Eig-Tree 132 

XXIV. 

Christ's Denunciations against the Scribes and Pharisees at different 
times, compared 138 

XXV. 

The Anointing of Christ by Mary of Bethany : the Evangelists com- 
pared 145 

XXVI. 

The Resolution of Judas to Betray his Lord, and its Immediate Occa- 
sion 153 

XXVII. 

Christ's saying, " I am among you as he that Serveth," and His 
Washing the Disciples' Feet 160 

XXVIII. 
Position of Judas at the Passover Table 164 

XXIX. 

The Agony in the Garden ; as illustrated by the Temptation in the 
Wilderness 172 



CONTENTS. 

XXX. 

PA( 

The Two Cries of the People, " Hosanna to the Son of David," and 
"Away with Him, Crucify Him." 11 

XXXI. 
Judas Eepenting at the Sight of Jesus Condemned li 

XXXII. 
Joseph of Arimathea, and His Mission 15 

XXXIII. 
Jesus, after his Resurrection, appearing first to Mary Magdalene 1! 

XXXIV. 

Christ's saying to Mary Magdalene, " Touch me not : for I am not 
yet Ascended to my Father." 21 

XXXV. 

The Incredulity of Thomas ; as Overcome in like manner with that of 
Nathanael 21 



HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 



Tlie Visit of the Wise Men; as directly occasioned by Daniel's 
Prophecy of the Messiah. 

Matt. ii. 1, 2 ; Daniel ix. 24-26. 

In the opening of the gospel history, we behold dis- 
tinguished Gentile strangers arriving at Jerusalem, and 
uttering the remarkable inquiry, " Where is he that is 
born king of the Jews?" Who were these men? 
Whence came they ? What did they mean by " king 
of the Jews ?" And, above all, how had they become 
possessed of the knowledge that a king of the Jews was 
just now to be born, of such peculiar dignity as to de- 
mand their personal homage ?* 

* The opinion of scholars on this point is thus expressed by Ellicott : 
" It has long been a matter of discussion what precisely led these Magi to 
expect a birth so prefigured. See Spanheim, Dub. Evang. Was it due to 
a carefully preserved knowledge of the prophecy of Balaam, an opinion 
entertained by Origen and the majority of the ancient expositors ; or was 
it due to prophecies uttered in their own country, dimly foreshadowing 
this divine mystery? (See citations from the Zend-Avesta.) Perhaps 
the latter view is the most probable, especially if we associate it with a 
belief, which the sacred narrative gives us every reason for entertaining, 
(Matt. ii. 12,) that these faithful men received a special illumination," 
&c. How has it come to pass that scholars have been so intent on the 
"dim foreshadowings" of the Zend-Avesta, as to overlook the explicit 
A* 9 



10 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

This last question, as it seems to us, has not received 
sufficient comparative attention. Biblical scholars dwell 
chiefly on the character of the star which these strangers 
allege that they have seen ; a matter of comparatively 
small importance. 

In attempting to answer this question, reference is 
commonly made to that expectation of a mighty Deliverer 
soon to arise from among men, which, at the time of our 
Saviour's birth, as history attests, was widely indulged 
amongst the nations. If we ask how such an expecta- 
tion came to exist, the reply is manifold. It may have 
arisen partly from the native conviction of the soul of its 
need of spiritual help — that which was desired to be, at 
length fixing itself as sure to be. It may have arisen 
partly from early tradition — the most important commu- 
nications from God to the progenitors of the race having 
been promises of a Redeemer. And it may have arisen 
partly from the predictions of the Jewish Scriptures, 
which, for some hundreds of years, had been widely cir- 
culated among the learned of many lands. 

This general expectation of a Redeemer, taken in con- 
nection with extraordinary appearances in the heavens, 
might, to some persons, seem sufficient to account for 
these wise men coming to Jerusalem with the inquiry 
which they proposed. 

But we may look further than this. The narrative 
styles these persons " Wise men from the East." May 
we not obtain valuable hints from the very form of these 

predictions of the prophet Daniel, "uttered," as all the probabilities allege, 
in the very country of these Magi. Some indeed make a general reference 
to the book of Daniel, but none, so far as we have seen, trace the exact 
correspondence between the visit and question of the wise men and the 
terms of Daniel's prophecy. 



VISIT OF THE WISE MEN. 11 

expressions ? The region designated as " the East," is 
of course very indefinite ; but it at once occurs to us, 
that the East, as the birth-place of mankind, would fur- 
nish the purest and most vivid traditions of primitive 
times. It would be in the East, rather than the West, 
that the expectation of a Deliverer soon to be born, 
founded on ancient tradition, would be strongest; and 
men from the East, rather than from the West, might 
be looked for in Jerusalem, making the inquiry of these 
wise men. 

There is, however, something noticeable in this very 
expression, "Wise men." It is the translation of the 
word " magoi." These Wise men were Magians. This 
appellation strongly points to Persia, as a narrower re- 
gion of " the East " from which these strangers came. — 
Magian was the designation of the Persian priesthood 
and nobility. 

Our attention being fixed on Persia, we at once recol- 
lect the fact that heathenism was there seen in its mildest 
and most spiritual forms. Also, from the bold and full 
tradition of the deluge which Persia furnishes, we infer 
the superiority of that country in all traditionary know- 
ledge. These, then, were the very persons of all others 
to come to Jerusalem, making the inquiry which they 
made ; for even if we were unable to see where they 
obtained such exact information as led them to just such 
a visit and just such an inquiry, we might well conclude, 
that possibly, in the most thoughtful of Persian minds, 
ancient traditions of a coming Deliverer may have rip- 
ened for fulfillment along with the prophecies of God's 
covenant people, until, the heavens giving birth to a 



12 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

new star, they were ready to interpret the occurrence as 
a token of the birth of the Expected One. 

But we need not stop here. The question, how these 
heathen sages became possessed of such knowledge as led 
them to make a pilgrimage at this time to Jerusalem, 
and to propose the precise inquiry which they proposed, 
admits of an explicit and satisfactory answer. And the 
answer shows us how remarkably one portion of God's 
word confirms another, and how, by minute and unin- 
tended agreements, the whole Bible may be confirmed 
to us, as a book of perfect truth. Let us see. 

We know that the Magians of Persia were learned 
men — that they were read in the accessible literature of 
all lands. We know that they were held in highest 
respect, as nobles of the State, and as counsellors and 
guardians of the king. This is the familiar teaching of 
history. 

Bear this in mind, and then remember that the Jews 
were seventy years captives in Babylon, where they had 
their Scriptures, and that they were restored to their own 
country by Cyrus, the conqueror of Babylon and founder 
of the Persian Empire, who himself was familiar with 
the Jewish Scriptures. And remember, especially, that 
the prophet Daniel, who alone of all the prophets re- 
corded the exact time of Messiah's advent, was himself a 
high civil officer under the first Persian monarchs in 
Babylon, and hence must have been widely and famil- 
iarly conversant with the Magians of his time. 

Eemembering all this, we may ask the following ques- 
tions : If the Jewish Scriptures had such circulation in 
Babylon that Cyrus became acquainted with them, must 
we not suppose that the learned Magians, his counsellors 



VISIT OF THE WISE MEN. 13 

and guardians, became even more thoroughly acquainted 
with them? And if the Magians studied the sacred 
books of the Jews generally, must we not think that their 
attention would be specially directed to the writings of 
Daniel, their cotemporary and companion, whose writings 
constituted a part of those sacred books ? And, if the 
Magians of that day had special familiarity with the 
writings of Daniel, would not the Magians of a later 
day, their successors, have those particular expectations 
of the Coming One which the writings of Daniel would 
give? 

All this probable conjecture receives confirmation from 
the fact that while Daniel alone, of all the prophets, re- 
cords the exact time of Messiah's birth, he reckons the 
time from a date in the civil history of the Persians. It 
is " from the going forth of the commandment (of Cyrus) 
to restore and build Jerusalem," that the weeks of Dan- 
iel's prophecy proceed. 

Now, examining that celebrated prophecy, we find an 
exact and literal correspondence between its principal 
terms and the several expressions of these wise men. 
And we find the prophecy to be of the precise character 
to set such men upon the making of precisely such a 
visit as Matthew represents these wise men actually mak- 
ing. The conclusion seems irresistible that the expecta- 
tions and conduct and language of these men were founded 
directly upon that prophecy. 

All that was needed, in their state of mind, to send 
them upon their visit, was the suggestion of some visible 
sign. They being astrologers, and ever watching the 
heavens for tokens of earthly occurrences, no wonder 
that when, at the exact time mentioned by Daniel as 
2 



14 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

that of Messiah's birth, they saw an extraordinary ap- 
pearance in the heavens, they cried, It is " Ms star"* 
And when Daniel spoke of no other place than " the holy 
city," in connection with the Messiah, no wonder that 
they came to Jerusalem seeking him, and asking, " Where 
is he?" "When Daniel called the predicted One the 
" Messiah," no wonder that they so explained themselves 
that Herod demanded of the assembled Council " where 
Christ should be born." And when Daniel spoke of 
Messiah as " the Prince," no wonder that they bronght 
royal gifts, and asked, " Where is he that is born Mng 
of the Jews?" 

These wise men, as just observed, were astrologers. 
They might also be called astronomers. In their studies, 
doubtless, science and superstition mingled. Chaldean 
Shepherds made the first recorded astronomical observa- 
tions. And judicial astrology took its rise in the region 
from which these Magians came. The very word magic, 
looking so strongly to the frauds of superstition, has the 

* The Commentators, with great unanimity, connect the star of the 
wise men with that predicted by Balaam. Num. xxiv. 17. The nature 
of any legitimate connection it is difficult to discern. 

Supposing Balaam's prophecy to relate to the Messiah, are we to think 
that Christ came as a star, only in the way of an extraordinary celestial 
phenomenon, to be appreciated by a few heathen astrologers ? Messianic 
prophecies are the perpetual heritage of the whole church. The Jews no 
doubt construed this prophecy figuratively : they had no thought, in con- 
nection with it, of any literal star. And the views of the wise men con- 
cerning this prophecy, had they any knowledge of it, beyond question 
would be adopted from the Jews. 

But where is the evidence that the Jews regarded this as a Messianic 
prophecy? And why are we to give it a Messianic character? (See 
Hengstenberg's Christology.) 

In any case, there seems to be no other connection between the star of 
the wise men and that of Balaam's prophecy than a chance verbal coin- 
cidence. 



VISIT OF THE WISE MEN. 15 

same origin as the word Magian. Yet we find that God 
gave these Magians a sign such as they would not fail to 
observe and improve — a sign in the heavens — a star. 
Behold here an evidence of God's condescending good- 
ness. He meets men wherever they go. He suffers 
them to'look nowhere for himself in vain.* 

Yet it may be asked, Supposing that this sign in the 
heavens fell in with the superstitions of astrology, and 
wedded itself to them, would it not seem that God had 
here granted his sanction to error ?f The words of Ne- 
ander are apt and unanswerable. " If it offends us 
to find that God has used the errors of man to lead him 
to a knowledge of the great truths of salvation, as if 
thereby he had lent himself to sustain the false, then 
must we break in pieces the chain of human events, in 
which the true and the false, the good and the evil, are 
so inseparably linked that the latter often serves for the 
point of transition to the former. . . . God condescends 
to the platforms of men, in training them for belief in 
the Redeemer, and meets the aspirations of the truth- 
seeking soul, even in its error." 

* The Magi are led by a star; the fishermen by fishes, to the knowledge 
of Christ. Bengel. f Strauss. 



II. 

The Baptism of Christ ; as illustrated by Bis Transfiguration. 

Matt. iii. 13-17 ,• Matt. xvii. 1-5 ; with their parallels. 

The Baptism and the Transfiguration have one grand 
feature in common. It is the solemn recognition from 
heaven, by God the Father, of Jesus as His approved 
Son. 

A further, although less obvious correspondence be- 
tween these striking occurrences, is seen in the relations 
which they respectively sustain to the public ministry of 
Christ. The Baptism stands at the entrance of that mi- 
nistry considered as a whole. In it the Father, seemingly 
for the encouragement of the Son in all his appointed 
work, acknowledges and approves him. So the Transfi- 
guration stands at the entrance of that marked period 
immediately preceding the death of Christ, for which all 
that had as yet occurred was mainly a preparation ; the 
period in which the special sufferings of our Lord were 
held in direct prospect, were spoken of to the disciples, and 
presently, in all their bitterness, were endured. As the 
Baptism stands at the entrance of our Lord's ministry 
considered as a whole, so the Transfiguration stands at 
the entrance of what may be called his passive ministry. 
As, in the former, the Father gives in advance a token 
of approbation to his Son, adapted to encourage him in 
the whole work before him; so, in the latter, when the 

16 



BAPTISM AND TRANSFIGURATION. 17 

Saviour's ministry is about to become most trying, and 
when his appointed sufferings might seem to betoken the 
Father's displeasure, he receives repeated and emphatic 
assurance of the Father's steadfast favor. 

Not, however, to dwell on this, we desire especially to 
call attention to the difference in the heavenly testimony 
given on these two occasions, and to what this difference 
intimates. This difference is often overlooked ; and the 
failure to observe it has helped to form what must be 
considered a very erroneous conception concerning the 
Baptism. 

Comparing the narratives of these events, we shall 
see that while, in connection with the Transfiguration, 
each of the three writers recording the event is careful 
to give, as a part of the solemn utterance from heaven, 
the injunction, "hear ye him," these writers uniformly 
omit any such injunction in their accounts of the Baptism. 
At the Baptism, the heavenly testimony, according to 
Matthew, was in these words, "This is my beloved Son, 
in whom I am well pleased." At the Transfiguration, 
according to the same Evangelist, the voice out of the 
cloud uttered precisely the same words, with the addition 
"hear ye him." 

It is thus seen that, at the Transfiguration, the heavenly 
voice was directed in part to the spectators of the scene — 
to Peter, James and John. And we know, from the 
Scriptures elsewhere, that these spectators understood the 
divine declaration.* At the Baptism, the spectators, 
whoever they may have been, were not addressed at all. 

From this difference, it is not difficult to infer, either, 
that the Baptism was not witnessed by the multitudes 

* 2 Pet. i. 16-18. 
2 * 



18 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

who were attending John's ministry, or, that witnessing 
it, they were not permitted to hear intelligibly the heav- 
enly voice. And this inference we cannot but regard as 
correct. 

The impression so common with casual readers of the 
history, and even with popular commentators, that the 
sublime attestation of the Messiahship of Jesus given 
in connection with his Baptism, was directed to the peo- 
ple at large, and was understood by them, is scarcely cre- 
dible.* Had this been the case, would not the effect of 
it have been stated ? No doubt had the people, eager 
for the coming of their Messiah, been thus publicly as- 
sured from the skies that their Messiah had come, and 
had they beheld Jesus designated as such by heavenly 
tokens, they would have become frantic with excitement, 
and at once enthroned Jesus as the Successor of David.f 
And how easy, in after years, had this occurrence been 
of the sort imagined, for Jesus to have referred his ene- 
mies to it, when they so persistently demanded of him 
a sign from heaven. Yet the event passed by, apparently 
without effect upon the people, and is never referred to 
again, except by the Baptist, who avers that, in his offi- 
cial character, he was permitted to witness the descent 
upon Jesus of the Holy Spirit. J 

The narrative speaks of the heavens being opened "to 
him" — to Jesus ; as if the heavenly witness was given 
mainly for his sake. In the particular mention of the 
Baptist, as also enjoying the sight of the descending 
Spirit, is it not strongly intimated that the privilege was 
limited to the Saviour and his Forerunner ? 

Some persons may imagine, that since the people seem 

* See Barnes, Jacobus, and others. f John vi. 15. J i. 32-34. 



BAPTISM AND TRANSFIGURATION. 19 

to have been present at the baj)tism of Jesus, they must 
have seen what is spoken of as visible, and heard what 
is spoken of as audible. But, even supposing that the 
multitudes were present, which is not declared, and is 
not at all certain,* it is enough to reply that here was a 
miracle, and it is impossible for us to say where the mi- 
racle might begin and where end, whether it might not 
extend to the eyes and ears of the people. When Paul 
was converted, he heard an articulate voice addressing 
him. His companions perceived only a sound or noise.f 
"When the voice came to Jesus out of the skies, declaring, 
" I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again," those 
that stood by thought that it thundered.J So here ; 
whatever the people may have seen or heard probably 
had for them no significance. For them, if anything 
at all, it was simply a blinding flash, as of lightning, 
and a stunning noise, as of thunder. 

This point is of importance, from its relation to our Sa- 
viour's whole course of procedure, in his public ministry, 
in communicating the truth that he was the Messiah. It 
is remarkable that he never made to the people an ex- 
plicit announcement of this truth. Farthest from it. 
Here and there, privately, and to those prepared to re- 
ceive it, he made the truth known, § but in his public 
relations he handled it with extreme caution. He per- 
mitted it to come upon the minds of the people only in 
an indirect way and in the most gradual manner, like 
the slow dawning of a great light. He often charged 
those who witnessed his most striking miracles, not to 

* Tholuck on John v. 36-38. f Acts ix. 1 ; xxii. 9. J John xii. 29. 
I John i. 41, 49 ; iv. 25. 



20 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

let them be known.* He would not suffer the devils to 
speak, because they knew that he was the Christ, f 

Now this whole procedure was self-consistent and is 
perfectly intelligible, apart from the common conception 
of the event before us ; yet it becomes utterly inexplica- 
ble, if we suppose that, in the very beginning of his mi- 
nistry, the truth of his Divine Sonship and Messiahship 
was flashed on the minds of the whole nation. Nothing 
but explicit statements of Scripture could justify this 
view. Not only are such statements wanting, but the 
view has no evidence of correctness whatever. 

* Matt. viii. ±; Mark v. 43; Luke ix. 21. f Mark i. 25, 34. 



III. 

The Temptation in the Wilderness ; as illustrated by Christ's JtebuTte 
of Peter. 

Matt. iv. 10 ; xvi. 23. Also their parallels. 

On two occasions, widely separated, we find our Sav- 
iour uttering the self-same words of stern reprimand, 
" Get thee behind me, Satan."* The one of these was 
that of the Temptation in the Wilderness. On this oc- 
casion, three distinct assaults upon the Saviour were made 
by the great Adversary. The last of these, it would 
seem, was that in which the Tempter, having taken the 
Saviour up into a high mountain, showed him all the 
kingdoms of the world and the glory of them, and ten- 
dered these to him on condition that he would fall down 
and worship him. This assault appears to have been 
the most determined and desperate on the part of the 
Tempter, and the most trying and grievous to the Sav- 
iour. Whatever disguise the Adversary may have as- 
sumed, he was now fully recognized in his proper char- 
acter, as the hideous Prince of wickedness, and speedily 
does the vehement rebuke of the Holy One put him to 
flight.f 

* The self-same in the latest Greek editions. 

f We have given above our own impression concerning the actual order 
of the second and third assaults of Satan, following Matthew's arrange- 
ment rather than that of Luke. The remarks on this point of Westcott, 
" Introduction to the Study of the Gospels," pp. 316, 317, are highly sug- 

21 



22 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

The other occasion of our Saviour's uttering the same 
reprimand, was not one in which the devil appeared in 
person. Only the disciples were present. And the rep- 
rimand was directed to a prominent apostle, who had 
just before witnessed that good confession of Jesus as the 
Christ which brought from the Master's lips the em- 
phatic commendation, "Blessed art thou, Simon Bar- 
jona." Yet the reprimand, while directed to Peter, was 
administered again upon the great Adversary. Peter is 
not named, nor recognized, in the language of the Sav- 
iour. As though the disciple were absent, and only his 
old enemy again confronted him, Christ once more ex- 
claims, " Get thee behind me, Satan !" 

This extraordinary language, never used at any other 
time, indicates an essential identity in the occasions which 
called for it. If, in the wilderness, Jesus was tempted of 
the devil, so was he when " Peter took him, and began 
to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord : this 
shall not be unto thee." And whatever the character 
of the temptation in the wilderness, when the devil ten- 
dered the Saviour the kingdoms of the world and their 
glory, the same temptation was again urged, in the re- 
monstrance and pleading of Peter. Such, at least, is the 
probable inference. 

This being the case, the one of these occasions may be 

gestive. " The representative points of the temptation, for the narratives 
imply much which they do not contain, are given in each case in the order 
which preserves a climax from the particular position occupied by the 
writer. . . . The sequence is one of idea, and not of time. The incidents 
are given wholly without any temporal connection in St. Luke, and the 
language of St. Matthew is more definite only in appearance. The nar- 
rative, indeed, is one which may perhaps help to show the impossibility 
of applying to things spiritual and eternal that 'phantom of succession,' 
in the shadow of which we are commonly forced to speak and act." 



THE TEMPTATION" IN THE WILDERNESS. 23 

taken to illustrate the other; the clearer character of 
the temptation in the case of Peter, may be permitted 
to throw light on the character, and hence on the cir- 
cumstances, of the temptation as it occurred in the wil- 
derness. 

We need not now trouble ourselves with the view of 
some expositors, that the whole scene of temptation in 
the wilderness was without objective reality, having oc- 
curred to our Saviour when he was in an extasy or 
trance, and that it possesses only a symbolic significance. 
The evidences of the reality of the occurrence are numer- 
ous and overwhelming. But rejecting this view, the 
question still remains, how far the records concerning 
this occurrence are to be literally interpreted. Did the 
Wicked One approach the Saviour in visible form, and 
utter in his ears an audible voice, and convey him through 
the air to a pinnacle of the temple, and take him again 
to the summit of a mountain and expose to his actual 
view the empires of the whole world? Or did the 
temptation begin and end in the desert, the Wicked One 
being personally, though not visibly, present ; and exert- 
ing his full power upon the Saviour, yet not by audible 
words and visible scenes, but by the forcible suggestion 
of such thoughts and such objects as he hoped would be 
enticing ? 

Upon these questions, the temptation by Peter may 
throw needed light. If we adopt the literal view, we 
must believe, for example, concerning the third tempta- 
tion in the wilderness, that the devil, having actually 
rapt the Saviour away from the pinnacle of the temple, 
carried him to the top of a mountain from which a view 
was had of the whole world. Here we encounter the 



24 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

difficulty, that a view of the whole world from the lofti- 
est mountain-summit is a physical impossibility. Fur- 
ther, we must believe that the Tempter sought to obtain 
from the Saviour, under the fascinations of visible earthly 
splendor, and in the prospect of attaining the highest 
worldly grandeur, an act of outward personal homage ; 
for the language of the Tempter is, " All these things 
will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me." 
The idea that the homage asked for was of such sort 
seems puerile. It has been well said that " no extraor- 
dinary degree of piety would have been necessary to 
rebuke such a proposal as this." 

Turning to the temptation which Peter occasioned the 
Master, we may learn that this third temptation in the 
wilderness was something different from what the literal 
theory supposes. It was essentially this : — a forcible sug- 
gestion to the mind of Jesus, that he should abandon his 
intention of establishing his Messianic kingdom in the 
world simply upon a spiritual basis — by means of weari- 
some instruction, and self-denying toils, and an igno- 
minious death ; and, instead of this, accept the powerful 
aid of the god of this world in establishing that kingdom 
as a universal empire on the basis of the kingdoms and 
the glory of the world. 

Let us review the narrative which exhibits the conduct 
of Peter and the significance of his remonstrance with 
the Master. The record in Matthew is as follows : 
" From that time forth began Jesus to show unto his 
disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer 
many things of the elders and chief priests, and scribes, 
and be killed, and be raised again the third day." Our 
Saviour was just entering upon a new era in his minis- 



THE TEMPTATION IN THE WILDERNESS. 25 

try, in which his special sufferings and coming death 
were held in prominent view.* To help prepare his 
disciples for receiving his instructions upon this subject, 
he had just brought from them the solemn avowal of 
their faith in him as the Messiah. f His first announce- 
ment of the great truth that the Messiah must suffer, 
made in the language just cited, startled the disciples. 
It was both surprising and distasteful. It produced, no 
doubt, a sudden and profound revulsion of feeling. 
" What ! their Master taken from them : his enemies 
successful against him and triumphing in his death! 
And he consenting to it ! It must not be." Such were 
their thoughts. And Peter, ever more forward than the 
rest, ventured to lead the Master aside, and not only to 
remonstrate against such teaching, but actually to reprove 
the Master and protest against his proj)Osed course. That 
course, thought Peter, would be fatal to the prospects 
both of the Master and of his disciples. Instead of this, 
Jesus might better proceed at once to " restore again the 
kingdom to Israel." 

And then it was that Jesus, discerning herein not 
merely the working of an unworthy feeling on the part 
of an imperfect disciple, but, further than this, the direct 
agency of the devil, who for the time was making use of 
the disciple as the vehicle for renewing his most mighty 
temptation, administers the stunning rebuke already cited. 
The prospect of his dying for the life of the world, of his 
ushering in his kingdom by the birth-pangs of his own 
humiliations even unto death — this was at the moment 
in the full view of the Saviour ; and the contemplation 
of it was painful enough for his flesh without the super- 

* See Chs. II. and XII. f Matt. xvi. 16. 

3 B 



26 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

added and wicked suggestions of the Tempter, that he 
might forego this in behalf of an easier way, that he 
might meet the desires and expectations of his disciples 
and of the whole people in assuming the throne of David 
and setting up a grand temporal kingdom ; so that with 
instant and vehement resentment, he stops the mouth of 
the disciple, and repels the Tempter. 

Viewing the third assault of the Adversary in the 
wilderness in the light of this temptation by Peter, and 
learning thereby to interpret as figurative the language 
concerning a personal homage to Satan on bended knees, 
and concerning an actual sight of the empires of the 
world from a mountain-height ; learning thereby to re- 
gard this third onset of the Tempter as a suggestion to 
the mind of Jesus that he should forego the career of 
humiliation opening before him, and secularize his king- 
dom; we can readily discern in the proceeding that which 
would have, even with the Holy One, the character and 
the force of a mighty temptation.* 

In his forty days' seclusion in the desert, the Sav- 
iour had doubtless been meditating upon his great work, 
about to be undertaken, of inaugurating the kingdom of 
God. Probably this work had presented itself to his 
mind in its many discouraging aspects. He well knew 
the opposition he would encounter in preaching his self- 

* "Looking at the matter, then, from all sides, we may sum up the 
meaning of the temptation of Jesus thus : In the decisive rejection of the 
false and the adoption of the true idea of the Messiah, in the refusal of a 
worldly kingdom and the choice of the kingdom of God, a triumph was 
gained over the power of evil generally, and this achievement not only 
evinced the capability of Jesus to found a Divine kingdom, but constituted 
him for all times the prototype of victory over every species of tempta- 
tion." 

Ullmann's Sinlessness of Jesus. 



THE TEMPTATION IN THE WILDERNESS. 27 

denying doctrines. He well knew the disappointment 
he would occasion the people, who in their Messiah were 
anticipating a glorious temporal deliverer. And, beyond 
doubt, his natural feelings contemplated the prospect with 
a painful shrinking. This being so, the Adversary, in this 
third assault, having some understanding of the burden 
oppressing the mind of Jesus,* seeks by skillful suggestion 
to divert him from his purpose. He endeavors to per- 
suade him to meet the carnal expectation of the people 
by allying himself with worldly power. He pictures to 
the imagimation of Jesus the glorious career which would 
at once open to him, consenting thus to modify his plans. 
And he pledges his own powerful influence for the exal- 
tation of Jesus, as Prince of a universal world-dominion 
and Lord of all earthly grandeur. But for the Saviour 
to yield to this suggestion, and accept the aid of the god 
of this world, what were it but to become the vassal of 
the Wicked One ? what were it but to do him worship ? 
And the bold assault, in which the Tempter seems to 
have gathered and applied his whole force, is promptly 
and successfully repelled. Adapted to be powerful, the 
temptation exerts no power. Hurled with might, it but 
rebounds with the greater violence, and with the more 
complete destruction to itself, like shattered glass from 
marble floor. 

The prompt and indignant rebuke of the Saviour sends 
the Adversary from his presence, doubtless in mortifica- 
tion and rage. 



IV. 

Uie Contempt of Nathanael for Nazareth, connected with the fact 
that he belonyed to Cana of Galilee. 

John i. 46 ; xxi. 2. 

When Philip, full of joy at his recent acquaintance 
with Jesus, makes the announcement to Nathanael, " We 
have found him of whom Moses in the law and the pro- 
phets did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph," 
Nathanael exclaims, " Can there any good thing come out 
of Nazareth?" 

The question occurs, why this extreme disparagement 
of the village to which our Saviour belonged, by this 
particular person ? 

It is commonly imagined that Nathanael herein merely 
exhibits an acquiescence in the general opinion that "no 
r>rophet," much less "The Prophet," should arise out of 
Ualilee, Nazareth being a village of Galilee.* It may 
well be doubted, however, whether at this time there was 
any such prevalent opinion. Probably this opinion was 
not advanced until Jesus had fully entered on his public 
ministry and the impression was becoming current that 
he was a mighty prophet of God. And it seems alto- 
gether natural to suppose that it was then announced as 
a dictum of the Scribes, and that its promulgation was 
one of the measures concerted by the enemies of Jesus 

* John vii. 52. 



NATHANAEl/s CONTEMPT FOR NAZARETH. 29 

for discrediting his divine commission and checking his 
growing popularity.* Besides,' the language of Natha- 
nael expresses more than a mere incredulity concerning 
Galilee being the native country of any prophet. His 
language is that not of incredulity, but of positive con- 
tempt. It instances not Galilee but Nazareth. It doubts 
whether any good thing by possibility can come out of 
Nazareth. And that this contempt was felt for Nazareth 
rather than Galilee, seems further probable from the fact 
that Nathanael belonged to Galilee. As Alfokd observes, 
"It is impossible that Nathanael, himself a Galilean, 
could speak from any feeling of contempt for Galilee 
generally." And although the word "Nazarene" was by 
and by used contemptuously, in connection with the 
name of our Saviour, even according to the predictions 
referred to by Matthew, f Nazareth being a mere village 
of outlying Galilee, and being viewed in contrast with 
the historic towns of Judea, and especially in contrast 
with Jerusalem, there seems to be no good evidence that 
among Galileans generally Nazareth was held in special 
dishonor. None of the other apostles are at any time 
represented as asking any such question as this of Na- 
thanael. 

How then came it to pass that just Nathanael, and 
nobody else, should have been prompted to ask this 
question ? 

The inquiry is of no great importance, except as its 
answer may bring to view another of those unintended 
and minute evidences of truthfulness, which abound in 
these records. In this instance, a most natural and gra- 
phic touch is imparted to the historic picture, exhibiting 

* John vii. 40-43. f Matt. ii. 23. 



30 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

what is universally recognized as the truth of common 
life. 

When we reflect for a moment, do we not see that the 
question of Nathanael would come most naturally from 
one who was familiarly acquainted with the localities 
about Nazareth ? Who else would be likely to interest 
himself in the comparative merits of Nazareth and other 
villages of Galilee ? And do we not see further, that if 
Nazareth would be despised by any, it would be by the 
inhabitants of neighboring and rival villages ? A citizen 
of Capernaum might speak disparagingly of the villages 
of Galilee generally, as inferior to his own town, but he 
would not naturally depreciate any one of them in any 
marked manner. But the world over, the people of con- 
tiguous towns indulge in feelings of foolish mutual con- 
tempt, and vilify each other's locality. If, therefore, we 
should discover that Nathanael actually belonged to the 
same part of Galilee Avith our Saviour, and especially if 
we should discover that he belonged to a village near to 
Nazareth, we should feel that his question concerning 
Nazareth had the appearance of the greatest possible nat- 
uralness. 

Well, we turn from the first chapter of John's gospel, 
where Nathanael is first introduced into the history, and 
where he proposes his question concerning Nazareth, to 
the last chapter, where alone he again appears by this 
name, and we find that, in the most casual way, Na- 
thanael is mentioned as belonging to " Cana of Galilee."* 
This was the village where Mary the mother of Jesus 
had friends, and where at the wedding-feast she seemed 
at home.f Cana thus appears in the history as a place 

* John xxi. 2. f John ii. 5. 



NATHANAEl/S CONTEMPT FOR NAZARETH. 31 

probably not remote from Nazareth. But, further than 
this, Cana has been recently identified by Dr. Robinson, 
as only some six or seven miles distant from Nazareth. 
" From the Wely above Nazareth, our friend Abu Nazir 
pointed out to us a ruin called Kana-el-Jelil, on the 
Northern side of the plain el-Buttauf, about N. J E., 
from Nazareth, and not far from three hours distant."* 
This place, rather than Kefr Kenna, only one and a half 
hours from Nazareth, Robinson, from the identity of 
names, as well as from other considerations, accounts the 
Cana of the gospels. 

Precisely he who asked, " Can there any good thing 
come out of Nazareth ?" of all others whose place of resi- 
dence is given in the history, was he who lived nearest 
to the village where Jesus was brought up, and was 
therefore most likely to ask just such a question. Yet 
the information needed to bring together the elements of 
probable truth, as we have seen, is furnished only in the 
most incidental way. 

It is generally held by Biblical scholars that Nathanael 
was identical with the Apostle Bartholomew. And it 
may be worth while just to mention here, as a pleasing 
coincidence, which does not require exposition in a sep- 
arate chapter, that while Nathanael is represented as hav- 
ing been found and brought to Jesus by Philip, the two 
apostles, Philip and Bartholomew, are inseparable in the 
catalogues given of the twelve by the Evangelists, and 
were probably close companions in their apostolic min- 
istry. 

* Robinson's Palestine, vol. iii. pp. 204-5. 



Y. 

Tlie Mealing of the Paralytic and of the Infirm, Man Compared. 

Mark ii. 1-12; John v. 1-9. 

The miracles of Christ were acts of self-revelation. 
In them were exhibited the various attributes of the 
God-man. The Son of God came in the nature of man 
to perform the work of Redemption. His miracles were 
a part of his work. Hence they were acts of redemp- 
tion, manifesting the grace and the power of the Saviour, 
and were typical of the full work in which man is re- 
deemed unto God. This is most evidently true of the 
miracles of healing. 

In two cases of miraculous healing, our Saviour gave 
the command, " Rise, take up thy bed and walk." The 
one was that of the man " sick of the palsy, which was 
borne of four," who was let down into our Lord's pres- 
ence through the uncovered roof. This is recorded by 
the first three Evangelists. The other was that of the 
man by the pool of Bethesda, " which had an infirmity 
thirty and eight years." This is recorded by the Evan- 
gelist John. According to the Harmonists, the latter 
of these cures followed closely upon the former. 

These cures, in their principal features, were strikingly 
alike. In both, Jesus issued the same injunction to the 
helpless invalid, and in both the grand demonstration of 
the reality and perfection of the cure was the man's rising 



THE PARALYTIC AND THE INFIRM MAN. 33 

from the bed, which had been the near witness and sup- 
porting companion of his helplessness, and bearing it as 
if in triumph away. 

There is, however, a difference in the accounts of the 
two cases, which, although at first sight apparently casual, 
yet upon closer consideration is found to have an instruc- 
tive meaning. In the one case, the narrative states, that 
at the command of Christ, " immediately he arose, took 
up the bed, and went forth before them all." In the 
other case, the language is, " And immediately the man 
was made whole, and took up his bed and walked." 

Thus it would seem that the Paralytic was not cured, 
in whole or in part, and of course had no evidence with- 
in himself of being cured, until he actually complied with 
the Saviour's command. Life came into his palsied frame 
and limbs, in the endeavor to rise and walk. But the 
Infirm man, if we may closely follow the record, was first 
healed, even as he lay ; and having some evidence of the 
reality of his cure already in possession, was encouraged to 
try his new strength in obeying the Saviour's command, 
thus receiving confirmation of the reality of his cure. 

Thus interpreting the records, we may, by an inspec- 
tion of the full narrative in each case, perceive a differ- 
ence in the circumstances of the two cures, admirably cor- 
responding to the difference in the cures themselves. 

The Paralytic belonged to Capernaum, the Galilean 
home of Jesus, one of those cities in which he performed 
"most of his mighty works." The previous narrative 
shows that already Jesus had wrought in this vicinity 
miracles of healing, and that just now his ministry was 
attended by enthusiastic multitudes. Evidently the sick 
man, and his friends who brought him to Jesus, had 
B* 



34 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

knowledge of these miracles, aud had faith in Christ's 
gracious power. The invalid himself may have been 
oppressed with desponding doubts concerning the willing- 
ness of Christ to heal one so unworthy as himself, but 
these doubts must have speedily given way under the in- 
spiring words of the Master, " Son, be of good cheer ; thy 
sins be forgiven thee." (Matthew.) It was not until 
after this indication of the Saviour's merciful disposition 
and divine authority, and not until after the explicit 
assertion of his authority against the scribes present who 
were disposed to question it ; it was not indeed until after 
he had given distinct intimation that he was about to heal 
the Paralytic by a word, and expectation, in the whole 
assembly and in the bosom of the invalid himself, was 
roused to the highest pitch of eagerness, that Jesus gave 
the command, " Rise, take up thy bed and walk." The 
narrative runs as follows : " Whether is it easier to say to 
the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee ; or to 
say, Arise, take up thy bed and walk? But that ye may 
know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive 
sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy) I say unto thee, 
Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine 
house." 

Thus, in the case of the Paralytic, a sufficient basis for 
active faith already existed, in the full acquaintance of 
the man with the Saviour ,• and the word of command 
carrying with it the strong assurance that healing would 
come in the very effort to obey, the man had sufficient 
encouragement to make the effort, even in advance of all 
signs that the cure had begun. 

The Infirm man, on the other hand, belonged to Jeru- 
salem. He lay in one of the porches of the pool of 



THE PARALYTIC AND THE INFIRM MAN. 35 

Bethesda, " by the sheep-gate." And Jesus had been but 
little in the sacred city. He was little known there. 
This man might possibly have heard of the Galilean pro- 
phet, but even if so, he did not now recognize Jesus as 
he. Even after his cure, he " wist not who it was " that 
had healed him. Thus there was no basis for faith in 
the command of Christ, "Rise, take up thy bed and 
walk." Such a command, unattended by any evidence 
of its divine authority, must have seemed a mockery, and 
the poor man, wounded in spirit, would have refused any 
attempted compliance with it. There must, indeed, have 
been something in the question of Jesus, and in his 
whole bearing toward the invalid, adapted to win his at- 
tention. Yet, when the great Physician, drawn to that 
place of suffering, as we may suppose, through his un- 
ceasing sympathy for stricken humanity, and selecting the 
person whose case was probably most pitiable of all, and 
whose spiritual condition in all likelihood was best 
adapted to receive a saving blessing from the Redeemer's 
gracious interposition — when Jesus approached the poor 
man with the strange question, "Wilt thou be made 
whole?" the answer is not that of kindled expectation, as 
though relief were at hand, nor are the regards of the man 
fixed upon his questioner, as though he could do him any 
good. His reply is that of the long disappointed invalid, 
cherishing only a bare hope that at some time the waters 
of this pool may yet be his cure. He says, " Sir, I have no 
man, when the water is troubled, to put me into the pool ; 
but while I am coming, another steppeth down before 
me." And, in immediate connection with this despond- 
ing reply, Jesus bids him rise and walk. 

No wonder, then, that the record runs, first, " and im- 



36 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

mediately the man was made whole," and secondly, " and 
took up his bed and walked." The miracle was wrought 
before the man attempted obedience. In the absence of 
other means of faith, he first had evidence of Christ's 
power in himself, and acted upon that. He felt the sud- 
den incoming of strength, the joyful tides of a new life, 
and herein recognizing the divine authority of him who 
spoke, leaped to obey him. 

And even thus, it may be. said, there are differences in 
the methods of grace, whereby men, helpless in sin, are 
brought to the enjoyment of spiritual strength. He who 
has been educated amidst Christian influences, has ac- 
quired a knowledge of divine truth, and has become 
familiar by observation with God's miracle of conversion, 
is commonly required to assume the vo*ws of the Christian 
profession, and commence openly the Christian life, with- 
out any previous assurance of a change of heart. Taking 
God at his word, confiding in the promise that strength 
shall be equal to the day, and actually undertaking the 
discharge of Christian duty, assurance comes to such an 
one in these very efforts. Thus his conversion is like the 
healing of the Paralytic. 

On the other hand, he who being greatly ignorant of 
religious things is called by God's grace into the Chris- 
tian life, not unfrequently has, at the outset, a marked 
experience of divine power in his heart. He feels differ- 
ently, and hence acts differently. His eyes are opened, 
his ears are unstopped, his soul is melted, and he moves 
forward under the impulses of the new life throbbing 
within him. Thus his conversion is like the healing of 
the Infirm man. 



VI. 

the Woman who tvas a Sinner, and Christ's Gracious Invitation. 

Luke vii. 36-50 ; Matt. xi. 28-30. 

Who was this woman, and how came she to act in the 
manner described ? 

By many persons it is assumed that the woman who 
here anointed the feet of our Saviour, was none other 
than Mary Magdalene. And this woman being repre- 
sented as formerly a notoriously dissolute person, " a sin- 
ner," this is the character popularly ascribed to Mary. 
Hence the name " Magdalen," commonly applied to vile 
women who have become penitent, and to the institutions 
devoted to their reformation. 

There is, however, no evidence that Mary Magdalene 
was such a person. True, her name appears in Luke's 
gospel soon after this scene of the anointing.* Yet the 
names of other women are given along with hers, " Jo- 
anna, the wife of Chuza," and " Susanna." And the 
reason assigned for these women, Mary included, having 
attached themselves to the company of Christ, is not the 
reason which the Saviour's gracious treatment of " the 
sinner " would have supplied, but the fact that they had 
been "healed of evil spirits and infirmities." These 
women, too, " ministered unto him of their substance ;" 
they were women of wealth and social position, which ill 



38 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

accords with the supposition that any of them had been 
women of the town. 

It is indeed said of Mary Magdalene, just in this place, 
that out of her " went seven devils ;" yet this does not 
argue her previous dissolute character ; for possession 
was more nearly allied to disease and insanity, than to 
moral impurity. This may be inferred not only from 
general statements of the gospel writers, but also from 
specific cases. For example, the demoniac boy, whom 
the disciples could not relieve, had suffered a dreadful 
possession from his very childhood.* Of course, the 
idea of a previous dissolute life is here precluded. 

Is it not time that intelligent readers of the gospels 
had dismissed from their minds all association of the 
Magdalene with the depraved of her sex ? 

But this anointing, recorded by Luke, is often con- 
founded with another, mentioned by the other Evangel- 
ists, in which Mary of Bethany is the actor, f The rea- 
sons for imagining these to be the same, frequently given, 
are the following : First, the close general similarity be- 
tween them ; Secondly, the fact that, in both instances, 
the host is named Simon ; and, Thirdly, the fact that, in 
both instances, offence is taken at the conduct of the woman. 

To this it may be replied, First, that in the course of 
the three years of our Saviour's ministry, some similar 
events might very naturally occur. We know that there 
were two similar miracles of feeding the multitudes, and 
two of taking great draughts of fishes, and that on two 
occasions the Pharisees demanded of Christ a sign from 
heaven, in both of which he replied to them in the same 
way. Further, there are important differences in the 

* Mark ix. 21. f Matt. xxvi. 6-13, and parallels. 



THE "WOMAN WHO WAS A SINNER. 39 

two anointings. They differ in the time and the place 
of their occurrence ; the evidences all going to show that 
this, recorded by Luke, occurred in a city of Galilee — 
probably Capernaum — and in the midst of our Lord's 
ministry, while that recorded by the others occurred at 
Bethany, near the close of his ministry. Moreover, 
nothing can be argued from the identity of the names 
of. the hosts ; for Simon was one of the most common 
of names, there being two Simons, for example, in the 
little company of the Twelve. Besides, these Simons 
are distinguished from each other, the one being Simon 
" the Pharisee," and the other Simon " the leper." Still 
further, while, in both instances, offence was taken at 
the act of anointing, it was by different persons in the 
two cases, here by the Pharisee, there by Christ's own 
disciples. 

Indeed, the idea of Christ being familiarly entertained 
by a Pharisee at Bethany, on the eve of his crucifixion, 
is preposterous. Who can imagine that, when the ma- 
lignity of the Pharisees had been intensified to the ut- 
most, and was impatiently awaiting its opportunity to 
murder Jesus ; this malignity, too, having reached its 
last degree of exasperation by the miracle of raising Laz- 
arus from the dead, our Saviour should have been found 
publicly feasting with the Pharisees, in the imme- 
diate neighborhood of Jerusalem, with Lazarus as a 
prominent fellow-guest? Yet this we must believe, if 
we regard the two accounts of the anointing as relating 
to the same occurrence. 

Evidently the supper at Bethany was of a simple sort. 
The scene is domestic ; the guests are a few devoted dis- 



40 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

ciples ; the entertainers are friends of Jesus. The dinner 
at the Pharisee's house was different in all these respects. 

If this reasoning be conclusive, we are relieved from 
the otherwise necessary yet startling inference, that the 
gentle Mary of Bethany had been a woman of infamous 
reputation.* 

The way is now prepared for bringing together the 
two passages referred to at the outset. The illustration 
which is thereby secured, is the more deeply impressive, 
regarding the nameless woman who here exhibits such 
depth of contrition and such tenderness of devotion, as 
not Mary Magdalene, not Mary of Bethany, but as one 
appearing now for the first time in the history, and then 
lost wholly from view. 

The conduct of the woman does not need to be de- 
scribed. The graphic language of the Evangelist sets 
before our eyes a full and vivid picture. " And behold, 
a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew 
that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee's house, brought 
an alabaster box of ointment, and stood at his feet behind 
him weeping, and began to wash his feet with tears, and 
did wipe them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his 
feet, and anointed them with the ointment." 

At first, the Saviour does not seem to heed this con- 
duct, either to approve or disapprove it. In silence he 
permits the woman to make her heart's offering, in her 
chosen way ; permits her to satisfy her own sweet will. 
And it is enough for her that she is unrebuked. The 
strong and affectionate desire to honor her Lord, will not 
be discouraged 3 by anything short of positive prohibition. 

* The author of the " Prince of the House of David " might well have 
spared himself a silly invention on this point. 



THE WOMAN WHO WAS A SINNER. 41 

Presently when occasion offers, Jesus evinces his de- 
lighted approbation. He welcomes all that she has done, 
as loving evidence of her true faith. And he gives her 
an abundant reward for her work of love, in the assur- 
ance that her many sins are all forgiven, and in his ben- 
ediction of peace. 

Now, in reading this narrative, we can hardly help 
endeavoring to conjecture the way by which this woman 
had been brought to such an acquaintance with the Sav- 
iour, as led her to act in the manner described. She 
must at some time have attended on his personal minis- 
try. ArM so doing, what gracious words must she have 
heard, what exhibitions of Divine compassion witnessed, 
and what inspirations of blessed hope enjoyed, to bring 
her to his feet thus dissolved in penitence and love ! 

But ivhen had she thus been won from the ways of sin, 
and made a true disciple ? When had she been brought 
to the step of decision, and notwithstanding all her op- 
pressive sense of dreadful guilt, and all her apprehensions 
that the might and mercy of the Saviour might not reach 
even to her, ventured to think of him as her loving Re- 
deemer ? "What was the special occasion — what the ex- 
hibition of Christ's unlimited power, or the declaration 
of his universal compassion — which had ended her weary 
struggles, swept away all distrust, and wrought the joyful 
confidence that his salvation was hers ? 

How naturally do such questions arise ! In frequent 
instances, similar questions can be met only by vague 
and worthless conjecture. And can these be any better 
met ? We reply that they can — that they admit of an 
answer highly probable, and full of delightful interest. 



42 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

Let us see how the answer is reached, and what it actually 
is. 

Immediately preceding this narrative of the anointing 
in Luke, we have the interview with Jesus of the mes- 
sengers of John the Baptist, and the remarks of our 
Saviour thereby occasioned. Looking now to the elev- 
enth chapter of Matthew, we find that it is mainly occu- 
pied with the same matter. And we find that the dis- 
course of our Saviour there given, following the interview 
with the Baptist's messengers, a discourse connected in 
all its parts and complete as a whole, winds up with that 
most tender of all the entreaties of Divine compassion — 
which has therefore obtained the appellation of the Sav- 
iour's " Gracious Invitation " — " Come unto me all ye 
that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you 
rest."* Now Luke, who gives only a portion of the 

* Not only is there a close connection in thought, in all this discourse, 
which some would be ready to ascribe to the happy arrangement of the 
Evangelist, rather than to the Saviour's actual utterance, hut there are 
notes of time in the transitions from one portion of the discourse to an- 
other, which determine the arrangement as that of the speaker rather than 
the writer. Thus we have, at the 20th verse, "Then began he;" and, at 
the 25th verse, "At that time Jesus answered." 

The objection that portions of this discourse are represented by Luke as 
having been spoken at a time subsequent to this (Luke x. 13-22) amounts 
to nothing. These reflections of Jesus were doubtless frequently indulged, 
and might very naturally be repeatedly uttered. 

We find Alpord writing thus : " The whole chapter stands in such close 
connection, one part arising out of another, and all pervaded by the same 
great undertone, which sounds %rth in vv. 28-30, that it is quite impossi- 
ble that this should be a collection of our Lord's sayings uttered at differ- 
ent times." Thus also Stier : " What St. Matthew communicates in this 
entire chapter, is a progressive series of sayings, spoken in continuation, 
just as they are here connected ; and forming one great concerted dis- 
course, gradually advancing towards its climax, which in vv. 27-30, gives 
the most complete an. wer to the question which had been received." 



THE WOMAN WHO WAS A SINNER. 43 

Saviour's discourse, omitting the Gracious Invitation, 
records next, and as if occurring immediately upon the 
close of this discourse, the entrance of Jesus into the 
Pharisee's house, and his anointing by this woman who 
was a sinner. Thus, when we harmonize the narrative, 
the words of the Gracious Invitation are seen to be the 
last which Jesus publicly uttered, before taking his place 
at the Pharisee's table.* 

Does it not hence appear in the highest degree proba- 
ble, that what decided this woman, bringing her to full 
and happy faith, was this discourse of the Saviour, and 
especially its closing invitation of Divine mercy ; and 
that she went from hearing and receiving that invitation 
into the Pharisee's house, to declare, in the affecting 
manner described, her newly inspired devotion ? 

And thus was this poor woman, this outcast and deso- 
late one, the first, in the long list of the burdened and 
broken-hearted, whom these precious words have reached, 
and rescued from despair, and brought to the fulness of 
Divine hope. 

* See Robinson's Harmony. 



VII. 

Sudden Outbreak of Pharisaic Hostility ; and its Immediate Occa- 
sion. 

Matt. xii. 24-37, and parallel passages. 

One of the most noticeable features in the gospel his- 
tory, is the growth of Pharisaic hatred and opposition, 
corresponding to the growth of Christ's popularity and 
the extension of his influence. 

Jerusalem was the stronghold of Pharisaism. Our 
Lord began his formal public labors in Jerusalem and 
its vicinity, but owing to the jealousy of the Pharisees 
soon withdrew from Judea to remoter Galilee.* 

Yet, even in Galilee, he was soon waited on and 
watched, not only by resident Pharisees, but by those 
delegated for the purpose and sent down from Jerusa- 
lem^ Such a delegation witnessed the miracle here re- 
corded, — that of casting out the devil, blind and dumb, — 
and led in the ensuing conversation.^ 

The hostility of the Pharisees, before this miracle was 
wrought, had become well pronounced. Yet never had 
it made such exhibition of itself as it now made. Here 
was a sudden outburst of opposition, not indeed in any 
form of physical violence, yet in a form none the less ex- 
pressive of malignant desperation. It makes hot and 

* John iv. 3 ; 43-45. f Luke v - !?• 

% Mark iii. 22, compared with Matt, and Luke. 
44 






OUTBREAK OF PHARISAIC HOSTILITY. 45 

energetic effort for the immediate and total destruction 
of our Saviour's influence over the people. These Phari- 
sees, having witnessed the amazing miracle, in which a 
demoniac was healed by the power of Jesus, and being 
unable to deny the fact of a miracle, account for it by de- 
claring that Jesus is in league with Beelzebub, the Prince 
of the devils. They seek to overwhelm him, by the con- 
fident ascription to him of such odious and diabolic char- 
acter, as must have caused all who credited them to 
shrink from him with horror. Their device is itself char- 
acterized by diabolic ingenuity. 

And as the malignant hatred of these Pharisees is thus 
suddenly roused, and is precipitated upon the unoffending 
and holy One, performing a most gracious work of heal- 
ing, so, as we might well have imagined, his spirit is 
stirred to oppose his enemies with a vehemence of argu- 
ment and a solemnity of warning, never before exhibited. 
Having shown in a happy rejoinder, that Satan cannot 
cast out Satan, and that if he may rightly be charged with 
having an unclean spirit, so may their own admired 
exorcists, he turns their minds to the consequences of 
their rejecting him, bringing to them as he does the king- 
dom of God, and declares the terrible doom of those who 
blaspheme against the Holy Ghost.* 

The question occurs, what was it that, on this occasion, 
aroused the fierce opposition of the enemies of Jesus? 
Cures of demoniacs had before been wrought by the 



* How deeply the heart of Jesus was grieved by this vile charge of his 
enemies, we might infer from the way in which he recalled and signalized 
it, on the occasion of his sending forth the Twelve. " If they have called 
the. Master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them 
of his household." Matt. x. 25. 



4b HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

Saviour. And, as the whole history shows, he had re- 
cently performed other miracles, in great number and 
variety, in circumstances of greater or less publicity. It 
is hardly satisfactory to suppose that the mere perform- 
ance of an additional similar miracle should, of itself, 
have occasioned this outburst of vindictive passion. 

The clue to an explanation completely satisfactory is 
given by Matthew, in a statement omitted by those other 
evangelists who narrate the charge of the Pharisees. It 
is the statement that, in view of this miracle, " all the 
people were amazed, and said, Is not this the Son of 
David?" 

This quiet statement may be easily passed over, in a 
hurried reading, without a thought of its peculiar signifi- 
cance. " The Son of David," imports nothing less than the 
long looked-for Messiah, the mighty Deliverer of Israel. 
And the question, whether Jesus is not he, now eagerly 
and expectantly asked, shows that the multitudes in at- 
tendance on the ministry of Jesus, and witnesses of the 
miracle just wrought, were rapidly coming to the belief 
that Jesus was the Messiah. 

Not long before this, as the Harmonists show, Jesus 
had raised to life the son of the widow of Nam. And in 
connection with that miracle, as we are told, " there came 
a fear on all ; and they glorified God, saying, That a great 
Prophet is risen up among us; and that God hath visited 
his people. And this rumor of him went forth through- 
out all Judea, and throughout all the region round 
about."* That miracle evidently produced a new im- 
pression, concerning the person who was performing these 
marvellous works. He was assuredly God's own mighty 

* Luke vii. 16, 17. 



OUTBKEAK OF PHARISAIC HOSTILITY. 47 

messenger — perhaps the Messiah himself. And this new 
impression became widely prevalent. 

Directly after this, it would appear, John sent his 
messengers to Jesus, inquiring "Art thou he that should 
come, or look we for another?" Art thou indeed the 
Messiah? And the answer and discourse of Jesus, fol- 
lowing upon this, must have tended to confirm the popu- 
lar impression previously received, and to lead the people 
to think, even more distinctly than before, that Jesus 
might be the Messiah. 

And now, when a new miracle is wrought before their 
eyes, in which, by a single exertion of the power of Jesus, 
a demon is expelled, the dumb is made to speak, and the 
blind to see, the people, previously excited to eager ex- 
pectation, can no longer refrain from expressing their 
ardent hope, and they pass round the earnest inquiry, 
"Is not this the Son of David?" Must he not be, in 
very truth, our Messiah ? " When Messias cometh, will 
he do more miracles than this man doeth?" And pro- 
bably the popular excitement, rapidly kindled, was just 
ready to break forth in mighty conflagration. 

And hence the vigorous promptness of the interposi- 
tion of the Pharisees. The popular acknowledgment 
of Jes\is as the Messiah would be fatal to their power. 
He would sweep away the whole existing order of 
things. An emergency has arisen, and they bestir 
themselves to meet it. They rush to the rescue. They 
stamp upon the kindling sparks, and repress the rising 
flames. Thus it is that the narrative runs, " But when 
the Pharisees heard it " — heard that thrilling question, 
" Is not this the Son of David ?" — " they said," thus 
and so, casting upon Jesus their vile imputation. 



48 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

And see how admirably their course meets the exi- 
gency. The people are ascribing to Jesus the most ex- 
alted character. They are viewing him as the powerful 
messenger of the Most High God. And the Pharisees 
cry, " He is indeed great in power, but not as the ally 
of the Lord. The mightier he is, the more is he to 
be dreaded. He casts out devils, because leagued with 
the Prince of the Devils."* 

Thus we see that just such occasion was offered these 
Pharisees, as was required in order that they should 
naturally have acted precisely as they did. And it may 
not be amiss to suggest further, that in all probability 
the efforts of the Pharisees were, for a time and to a 
degree, successful. The minds of the people were di- 
verted from their previous thoughts, and the subsequent 
history leads us to think, that, under the specious and 
confident calumnies of their revered religious teachers, 
doubts came upon many concerning the character of 
Jesus.f 

* In Matt. ix. 27-34, we have a brief record concerning two miracles ; 
the first, of the healing of two blind men who followed him, crying, " Thou 
Son of David, have mercy on us;" the second, of the dispossession of a 
dumb demoniac, to the great astonishment of the multitudes, and to the 
exasperation of the Pharisees, who said, "He casteth out devils, through 
the Prince of the Devils." These miracles, although presented in the 
record prior to the miracle under consideration, are commonly regarded 
by the Harmonists as having actually occurred after it, the account of 
them being placed next after that of the raising of the daughter of Jairus. 
The order as given by Matthew, is, however, followed by some. Lange, 
in loco, referring to Matt. ix. 34, says, " The former private accusation, 
that Jesus was in league with Satan, was now publicly and boldly brought 
forward." 

f It may be seen that after this the element of admonition becomes more 
prominent in the Saviour's teachings. He warns the people against re- 
jecting himself, cautions them against the influence of the Pharisees, and 



OUTBREAK OF PHARISAIC HOSTILITY. 49 

It is interesting, moreover, to observe, how, in other 
instances, Pharisaic hatred to Jesus exploded, upon the 
ascription to him of the Messianic character, under this 
same appellation, " Son of David." 

On the occasion of his triumphal entry into Je- 
rusalem, when the people were bestowing this title 
upon him in their Hosannas, we read that " some of 
the Pharisees from among the multitude said unto him, 
Master, rebuke thy disciples." And shortly after, 
when, in the temple, the children took up the cry, 
" Hosanna to the Son of David," the record is that the 
chief priests and scribes " were sore displeased, and said 
unto him, Hearest thou what these say ?" 

Thus we have a glimpse of Pharisaic hostility, when 
Jesus was in the midst of his Galilean ministry. This 
opposition was afterward still more fully organized, 
and made still more formidable. The subsequent his- 
tory shows the Saviour in perpetual view of it, and in 
frequent conflict with it. For a long time he completely 
baffles it. At last, his active ministry having been ac- 
complished, and his hour fully come, a disciple betrays 
him to these enemies, and he yields himself to their 
murderous will, in the exclamation, " Now is your hour 
and the power of darkness." 

denounces the Pharisees themselves. Also, when our Saviour afterward 
asked his disciples, " Who do men say that I, the Son of Man, am V 
(Matt. xvi. 13,) amidst the great variety of opinions stated in reply, as 
held by the people, nothing is said of the opinion being entertained by 
any that he was the Messiah. 



VIII. 

Iievi's Feast, in several relations ; especially Christ's Representation 
of Himself as the Bridegroom, 

Matt. ix. 15, and parallels j also John iii. 29. 

A study of the simple narrative of the "reception"* 
given to the Saviour by Levi, (whom we regard as 
identical with Matthew,) where the Master ate with 
publicans and sinners, shows this portion of the history, 
in the different parts of it, linked in with the history 
elsewhere, in a very remarkable manner. No inventor 
of history has been equal to the work of producing a 
narrative so vividly natural as this, and at the same 
time of so inserting it into a body of history, as to give 
it living relations to every portion. This brief section 
is a tree which sends its roots deep and wide into the 
whole soil of the evangelic narratives. 

We may only glance at a few of the instances which 
illustrate this, reserving special remark for the repre- 
sentation above announced of Christ as the Bridegroom. 

In the first place, as has frequently been observed, 
we have an evidence of naturalness in the fact that 
while it is Matthew who gives the feast, and while 
Mark informs us that the feast was given at Matthew's 
house, and while Luke declares that it was "a great 
feast," made at Matthew's " own house," Matthew him- 

* Luke. 



Levi's feast. 51 

self, in his account of it, modestly conceals the fact that 
it was a feast, and that it was given by himself and at 
his own house, simply saying, " And it came to pass, 
as Jesus sat at meat in the house." 

Again : On this occasion, Jesus mingles with outcasts 
from Jewish society, doing so for their spiritual benefit, 
going among them as a physician among the sick. 
Evidently from this, the Saviour regarded the publicans 
and their companions as most hopeful subjects of his 
ministry. And how exactly and remarkably does this 
judgment of the Saviour coincide with the intimations 
of the history given elsewhere. Thus we find the pub- 
licans frequenting John's baptism : " Then came also 
publicans to be baptized, and said unto him, Master, 
what shall we do?"* Also we find that the reception 
of John's ministry by the publicans was of so marked 
and suitable a sort, as to be particularly mentioned in 
the subsequent history. In connection with Christ's 
encomium on the Baptist, it is said that " all the people 
that heard him, and the publicans, justified God, being 
baptized with the baptism of John."f And far on in 
the history, at a time long subsequent to Matthew's 
feast, we hear our Saviour addressing the chiefs of the 
nation in these emphatic words, " Verily I say unto 
you, that the publicans and harlots go into the kingdom 
of God before you."| 

The facts on this subject, disclosed in the most casual 
way at different times, yet exactly agreeing with one 
another, are these : First, By the Baptist's ministry, 
the publicans and their associates had been brought into 
a condition to make Christ's labors among them most 

* Luke iii. 12. f Luke vii. 29. J Matt. xxi. 31. 



52 HOUES AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

hopeful. Next> one well-known publican soon became 
an apostle, and Christ, by his agency, conies into near 
contact with the whole class of his fellows, preaching to 
them the kingdom of God. And lastly, the members 
of this class are found entering the ranks of Christ's 
followers, when others were steadily refusing disciple- 
ship. 

Again: In immediate connection with this feast, a 
deputation waited on our Lord, proposing to him an im- 
portant question. From Luke's account, we should 
have inferred that this deputation consisted only of 
Scribes and Pharisees ; for Luke, having spoken of these 
before, continues his narrative as follows, "And they 
said unto him." From Matthew we should have in- 
ferred that the deputation consisted only of certain 
adherents of the Baptist; for Matthew's language is, 
"Then came to him the disciples of John, saying," etc. 
The apparent discrepancy, which in other similar in- 
stances can commonly be reconciled by reasonable con- 
jecture, is here reconciled by Mark's statement, that 
"the disciples of John and of the Pharisees" "come 
and say unto him." These two parties unite in their 
mission, having alike been accustomed to fast, their 
question relating mainly to fasting. 

Now how natural that the inquiry, "Why do the 
disciples of John and of the Pharisees fast, but thy dis- 
ciples fast not?" should have been made in connection 
with a feast; how true is the information here given to 
what we know elsewhere of John's ascetic character; 
and how exactly was the contrast hereby presented be- 
tween the conduct of John and of Christ, in the malig- 
nant view taken of it by the Pharisees, expressed by 



Levi's feast. 53 

the Saviour, when he said, " For John the Baptist came 
neither eating bread nor drinking wine, and ye say, He 
hath a devil. The Son of man is come eating and 
drinking, and ye say : Behold a gluttonous man and a 
wine-bibber, a friend of publicans and sinners."* 

Again: In Luke's account of the question of this 
deputation, we find proposed not only the matter of 
fasting, but also of praying. Luke writes, "Why do 
the disciples of John fast often, and make prayers?" 
From this it is evident, that the Baptist prescribed rigid 
rules not only concerning fasting, but also concerning 
praying. It seems natural to infer that he gave them 
some formularies of prayer. And how exactly, yet 
how wholly incidentally, is this inference established 
by the direct narrative elsewhere. Thus it is said, 
"And it came to pass that as he was praying in a cer- 
tain place, when he ceased, one of his disciples said unto 
him, Lord, teach us to pray, as John also taught his dis- 
ciples."^ And it was on this occasion that, for the 
second time, the Master gave that formulary commonly 
known as "The Lord's Prayer." J 

• ; ' : "Luke vii. 33, 34. fLuke xi. 1. 

J We have omitted to compare this instance in which our Saviour ate 
with publicans and sinners, with that in which he became the guest of 
Zaccheus the publican, or as his enemies phrased it, "guest with a man 
that is a sinner." (Luke xix. 2-10.) The comparison will be found in- 
structive. 

Also, we have not called attention to the saying of Christ, quoted from 
the Old Testament, " I will have mercy and not sacrifice," applied here, 
and also on another occasion. (Matthew xii. 7.) It may be seen that the 
saying has an application equally apt in the two instances. Also, regard- 
ing Levi's Feast as having occurred after the plucking of the ears of corn 
on the Sabbath, as the Harmonists show to have been probable, we 
perceive the reason of Christ's greater severity of rebuke, when now 
5 « 



54 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

We come now to our Saviour's reply to the question 
of this deputation, in which is found the figure of the 
bridegroom. He justifies the absence of fasting, in the 
case of his disciples, on the ground that the present is 
Avith them a time of joy. The general teaching is, that 
fasting may not properly be observed for its own sake, 
and without regard to seasons and' circumstances. Fast- 
ing is suitable for the time of mourning, and is becom- 
ing to the disciples of Christ whenever he is not joy- 
fully manifest to them; but fasting in circumstances of 
joy is incongruous and undesirable. 

This teaching our Saviour clothes in figurative lan- 
guage. He asks, "Can the children of the bride- 
chamber" — the near attendants of the bridegroom — can 
they "mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them?" 
— while the marriage festivities continue? "But the 
days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken 
from them, and then shall they fast." This figure was, 
of course, perfectly intelligible and highly forcible, in 
itself considered ; weddings, by universal agreement, 
being accounted and celebrated as joyful occasions. 
And the Saviour's language affords a complete and sat- 
isfactory reply to the immediate question of both John's 
disciples and the Pharisees concerning fasting. Yet, 
when we bring into connection with this passage that 
found in John iii. 29, and regard our Saviour as now 
tacitly referring to that passage, in his use of the figure 
of the bridegroom, his reply becomes, for the adherents 
of John, not only far more forcible, but far more widely 

making this quotation. His enemies had been slow to learn the lesson 
which he had once before given them. And he will have them now "go" 
instantly, "and learn what that meaneth." 



Levi's feast. 55 

reaching. This point, we think, deserves a careful ex- 
amination. 

The Baptist's disciples, on the occasion referred to, 
had been discussing with the Jews some questions con- 
cerning purifications.* Just as here, they were troubled 
about the outward rites of religion. And evidently 
their discussion with the Jews had something to do 
with the right of Christ's disciples to baptize, which 
the latter were now doing; for to this they make dis- 
tinct reference. Alarmed at the growing popularity of 
Jesus, and the corresponding decline of the cause of 
their own Master, they come to John with the com- 
plaint, "Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, 
to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same bap- 
tizeth, and all men come to him." And the Baptist, in 
reply, nobly avowed that this state of things was every 
way suitable. He reasserts his own humble character, 
as the mere harbinger of the Messiah. He ascribes to 
Jesus a character infinitely superior to his own. Jesus 
has come from above, and is above all, while he is only 
of the earth, and speaks of the earth. And as Jesus is 
infinitely superior to him in character and authority, it 
is fitting that the ministry of Christ should engage 
supreme attention, and that his own ministry should be 
disregarded and forsaken, for "He must increase, but I 
must decrease." 

It is in the midst of such statements as these, that 
the Baptist introduces the figure of the Bridegroom, 
applying it to Jesus and himself. "He that hath the 
bride, is the bridegroom ; but the friend of the bride- 
groom, which standethand heareth him, rejoiceth greatly 

* See John iii. 25-34. 



56 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

because of the bridegroom's voice; this my joy there- 
fore is fulfilled." 

When, then, John's disciples come to Jesus with a 
question about rites and forms, dissatisfied that Jesus 
does not insist on the same outward observances which 
their Master had required, being thus disposed to 
adhere to John as against Jesus; and when, in reply to 
them, Jesus uses the same figure of speech which had 
afforded the central and governing thought in that dis- 
course of the Baptist in which he had settled these 
matters for his disciples ; can we help thinking that the 
Saviour adopted the figure — intended the coincidence — 
and meant to bring the authority of the Baptist to bear 
upon his dissatisfied disciples ? 

Thus Christ seems to say to them, "Your own Mas- 
ter taught you that I am the bridegroom, to stand in 
whose presence is a joy. If this be so, can my dis- 
ciples, children of the bridechamber, living in my joy- 
ful presence, do otherwise than rejoice? And, further, 
why do you not acquiesce in my authority, even 
though my rules of discipline be different from those of 
John, when he taught you that he was only my servant, 
and that my authority was law to himself? And still 
further, why adhere to John as against me, placing your- 
selves now in the company of opposing Pharisees, when 
your Master so plainly taught you that his ministry was 
only intended to usher in mine, and that none could 
properly join themselves to him, except for the end of 
becoming my disciples?" 

Thus bringing these two passages together, our Sa- 
viour's language, in the instance before us, is clothed 
with a far wider and fuller meaninsr. And that our 



CHRIST THE BRIDEGROOM. 57 

Saviour intended his saying to be viewed in the light 
of that of his Forerunner, seems evident from the exact 
harmony subsisting between them, at so many points, 
and from the fitness of their concurrence to his purpose. 
Yet the two are not brought together by the Evange- 
lists. The coincidence seems to have been on their part 
undesigned. 



C* 



IX. 

The Disciples unexpectedly compelled to Embark and Cross the 
JOalce: and the Reason for it. 

Matt. xiv. 22. John vi. 14, 15. 

The Apostles had returned from their trial mission, 
and made report concerning it to the Master. Upon 
his proposition, they took ship with him for the farther 
side of the sea of Galilee, to avoid the multitudes, and 
secure rest and leisure, at least sufficient for an undis- 
turbed meal. "And the Apostles gathered themselves 
together unto Jesus, and told him all things, both what 
they had done and what they had taught. And he said 
unto them, Come ye yourselves apart into a desert place, 
and rest a while : for there were many coming and going, 
and they had no leisure so much as to eat."* 

With this movement, the intelligence just received, 
of the beheading of John the Baptist, also had some- 
thing to do.f 

The multitudes, however, anticipated this movement, 
and anxious to continue in the Saviour's company, they 
made their way by land around the head of the lake, 
and were ready to meet him when he disembarked. 
Jesus compassionately renews among them his ministry, 
both of preaching and of healing their sick, and, doubt- 
less, the previous admiration for him suffers no abate- 

* Mark vi. 30, 31. f Matt. xiv. 13. 

58 



THE DISCIPLES THWARTED. 59 

ment, but corresponding increase. These multitudes, con- 
sisting largely of people from the country, now on their 
way to the passover, were probably less influenced by 
the hostile Pharisees, and were more ready to yield 
their tribute of praise to Jesus, than were the inhabi- 
tants of Capernaum.* 

As the day wears away, and the necessity for some- 
thing to eat becomes pressing, Jesus performs that as- 
tounding miracle, in which five loaves and two fishes 
are multiplied into sufficient food for the many thou- 
sands. 

Immediately after this, we find that Jesus, instead of 
withdrawing from the multitudes with his disciples, in 
order that they may quietly remain together in that re- 
tired place, according to their intention in coming there, 
— instead of this, compels his disciples to take again to 
their vessel and return across the lake, while he re- 
mains to dismiss the multitudes. (Matt, and Mark.) 

This, even upon the most casual view, seems strange ; 
yet, when we examine the language of the record, it is 
still more surprising. Both writers use the same words. 
They say that "straightway" he "constrained" his dis- 
ciples to get into the ship. His act was prompt and 
authoritative. It compelled a reluctant obedience. 
Evidently a crisis of some sort had suddenly arisen. 
Evidently the disciples were now involved in some 
matter or movement unwelcome to the Master. Evi- 
dently they were so much in earnest in it, and so de- 
termined upon it, that only the most decisive measures 
on his part were adequate to suppress it. 

But where else are any intimations of such a crisis 

* John vi. 4. See also page 47. 



60 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

having come, or of anything unusual having occurred 
involving the disciples ? No such intimations are found 
elsewhere in the two gospels quoted. And none are to 
be found, so far as we know, anywhere else, save in the 
parallel account in John's gospel. That account does 
not, indeed, say a word concerning Christ's compelling 
his disciples to leave the place. The disciples are not 
so much as mentioned. Yet John's account of what oc- 
curred immediately after the miracle, is found to supple- 
ment that of Matthew and Mark, and the two together 
furnish the materials with which to reproduce an extra- 
ordinary scene, otherwise not dreamed of, enacted just 
at that time, on the banks of the sea of Galilee. 

"We cannot but think that the effect of such a miracle 
as that of feeding the five thousand men, not only wit- 
nessed, but actually participated in, by those who were 
already aroused to high enthusiasm, would be well nigh 
overwhelming. And the statement of John, although 
very simple, is immensely significant. He writes, 
" Then those men, when they had seen the miracle that 
Jesus did, said, This is of a truth that Prophet that 
should come into the world." They settled it in their 
minds, and proclaimed it to one another, that Jesus was 
the long-predicted prophet like unto Moses. Diseases 
have fled at his touch, and now bread for thousands has 
issued from his creative hands, and herein they see God 
visiting his people and removing from them the curse. 
And if Jesus shall have sway, there will be no more 
sickness, no more poverty, no more toil ; all want and 
woe will disappear. Probably they think that if he be 
indeed " that Prophet," he must be the promised " Son 
of David," and hence their desires seem to them to con- 



THE DISCIPLES THWARTED. 61 

spire with God's purposes, when they cry, " Come, let 
us make him a king, and join ourselves to him as his 
steadfast and happy subjects, and receive the blessings 
of his reign." For, as John further informs us, the 
people were ready actually to enthrone Jesus, and would 
have used the most energetic means to accomplish their 
purpose, had he not thwarted them. John writes, 
" When Jesus therefore perceived that they would come 
and take him by force, to make him a king, he departed 
again into a mountain himself alone."* 

Thus, then, John's gospel shows the people in a state 
of intense excitement, just ready to enthrone the Saviour, 
and the Saviour watching the unwelcome movement and 
taking measures to thwart it ; while Matthew and Mark 
show us the disciples suddenly compelled by the Master 
to embark upon their vessel, and quit the scene of the 
miracle and the multitudes. 

It needs no great effort of the imagination to combine 
these representations. We know well enough that the 
disciples could not have been indifferent spectators of 
what was going on among the people. We know well 
enough that they would be little likely to use their influ- 
ence in quelling the excitement and restraining the pro- 
posed movement. The narratives elsewhere give us 
abundant evidence of the worldly views of the disciples 
concerning the Messiah and his kingdom. They could 
not brook the thought that the Master should realize his 
predicted character of a suffering Saviour, f They were 

* The supposition is not improbable that as the multitude were on the 
way to the passover, they intended to conduct Jesus in triumph to Jeru- 
salem, and enthrone him there. 

| See Ch. III. p. 21. 



62 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

eager for positions of worldly honor in the coming king- 
dom.* Even after the Resurrection, and just before the 
Ascension, they hoped that Jesus would even then as- 
sume the throne of David and restore the power of the 
Jewish nation.f 

Is it not, indeed, in the highest degree probable, that 
now the disciples fully shared the feelings of the people ? 
May we not think that, at the suggestion of the people, 
they headed the movement in hand ? Were they not 
the ringleaders in this project of enthroning their Mas- 
ter ; a project intended to honor him, yet wholly mis- 
taken, unworthy, and destructive of his plans, and de- 
manding from him the most prompt and vigorous efforts 
to crush it?| 

Nothing can be more natural than these suggestions. 
Yet they enable us to complete the picture of that scene 
in which Jesus resists the efforts of the people to enthrone 
him. For they show the Saviour seizing upon his dis- 
ciples, tearing them from the multitudes, sending them 
to their ship, and commanding them away, as the most 
direct and effective method of breaking the popular spell, 
and hindering the popular design. 

No wonder that the disciples yielded to the Master 
most unwillingly. ]STo wonder that his full authority 
was needed in order to resist them. They were relin- 
quishing the present fulfillment of their most fondly an- 

* See Ch. XVI. f Acts i. 6. 

J Da Costa, writing upon another subject, calls attention to the fact, 
that Mark here uses a military word, and that the accurate translation 
would here be, " while he disbanded the multitudes." This looks as if the 
people had already organized themselves for the intended effort. 

See ''The Four Witnesses," p. 100. 



THE DISCIPLES THWARTED. 63 

ticipated schemes. They were consenting to see their 
most ardently cherished hopes yet longer deferred. 

Need we marvel, in view of all the probabilities, that 
the record runs, " And straightway Jesus constrained his 
disciples to get into a ship, and to go before him unto 
the other side, while he sent the multitudes away?" 
This declaration, rather, is seen to meet the exact and 
full state of the case, as all the probabilities represent it. 



X. 

Crisis in the History of Judas. 

John vi. 70, 71. 

This chapter needs to be considered in connection 
with the preceding. 

The next day after the miracle of feeding the five thou- 
sand men, Jesus is found in the Synagogue of Caper- 
naum. His disciples are with him, and many of those 
who, the day before, had shared in his miraculous 
bounty, and sought to enthrone him as the Messiah. 
Likewise hostile "Jews" are present, at first retired and 
silent, but soon coming conspicuously forward. 

In answer to the question of curiosity, asked by some 
who had been with him the previous evening, "Rabbi, 
when earnest thou hither?" Jesus commences a discourse 
of the highest practical moment. He at once rebukes the 
worldly spirit of his auditors, and directs their attention 
to himself as a spiritual rather than a worldly benefac- 
tor. "Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I 
say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the mi- 
racles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were 
filled. Labor not for the meat which perisheth, but for 
that meat which endureth unto everlasting life." Thus 
the discourse harmonizes with his conduct the evening 
before, in breaking up the attempt to make him a 
worldly king. 



CRISIS IN JUDAS' HISTORY. 65 

The discourse, conceived in this strain, falls upon un- 
willing ears. Questions arise; unbelief begins its de- 
mands ; and, when Jesus, instead of proffering proofs of 
his divine claims, proceeds to assert those claims in a 
manner still more offensive, the hostile Jews commence 
their murmurings, and from murmurings go on to a very 
tumult of strife. They asked, " How is it that he saith, 
I came down from heaven?" They "strove among 
themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh 
to eat." — Meanwhile Jesus only advances still more 
absolute claims, and asserts the truth in still more offen- 
sive forms. He is the bread of life, and except they eat 
the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, they 
have no life in them. 

Thus does Jesus, exhibiting himself in mysterious 
words, as a spiritual benefactor, endeavor to cut up by 
the roots all mere worldly expectation concerning him. 

As the result of this exposition of the Saviour's doc- 
trine, not only were those greatly exasperated who had 
before been hostile to him, but many who had attached 
themselves to his ministry forsook him. "From that 
time many of his disciples went back, and walked no 
more with him." They were glad to share the outward 
advantages conferred by his miracles, but they had no 
faith to receive his teachings which seemed strange to 
the natural understanding, and they had no such spiritual 
desires as disposed them to embrace him as the Messiah 
of their hearts. 

The juncture was most solemn. The chaff was rapidly 
separating from the wheat, the Son of man having taken 
his fan in hand and proceeding to purge his threshing- 
floor. The disappointed and offended multitudes were 



66 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

forsaking him ; even many of those who had been his 
admiring followers were dropping from his presence; 
the contagion bids fair to become universal, and Jesus 
seems about to be left utterly alone. At this juncture, 
he turns upon the twelve, with the solemn appeal, 
"Will ye also go away?" The appeal does not long 
remain unanswered. Peter responds, for himself and 
his fellows, in those affecting, noble words of love and 
faith, "Lord, to whom shall we 2:0? Thou hast the 



that thou art that Christ, the Son of the Living God." 
And now come the words to which we would invite 
special attention. For, how does Jesus receive this 
confession of his disciples? We cannot but think that 
it must have been most grateful to him. We naturally 
look to see him approve and honor it. We know that 
when Peter made a similar confession, under circum- 
stances much less trying, Jesus exclaimed, " Blessed art 
thou, Simon Bar-jona."* Yet now we find that Jesus 
replies to the confession of his disciples, most strangely 
and abruptly, with words of stern reproach and con- 
demnation. He asks, as if in indignation, " Have not I 
chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?" And 
the Evangelist informs us, that "he spake of Judas 
Iscariot, the son of Simon ; for he it was that should be- 
tray him, being one of the twelve." 

Who can read this narrative, without inquiring why 

it was that the falseness of Judas' character should just 

now have risen so prominently before the mind of the 

Saviour as apparently to overshadow all things else? 

We might at first imagine that this intense feeling of 

* Matt. xvi. 16. 



CRISIS IN JUDAS' HISTORY. 67 

displeasure against Judas was now aroused, simply in 
view of the fact that he had hypocritically acquiesced in 
the solemn avowal just made of attachment to Christ, 
and of faith in his Messiahship. But was there not 
equal hypocrisy in Judas' acquiescence in the confession 
of Peter, referred to above? Yet, on that occasion, 
Jesus does not advert to this hypocrisy, but only com- 
mends his disciples? There seems to have been some- 
thing peculiar in the case of Judas, just at this time. 

And may there not, we ask, have been just now a 
marked development in the character of Judas? May 
not the hypocrisy of Judas, as now manifested, have 
been something new? May not this have been the 
critical occasion in which Judas passed from the condi- 
tion of a self-deceived disciple, to that of a conscious 
hypocrite? May not Judas have shared the disappoint- 
ment and disgust of the worldly multitudes and fickle 
followers of Jesus, and had it in his heart to leave his 
Master; and may he not now in heart have actually 
turned from Mm, so far as a true regard for him was con- 
cerned, yet have resolved to remain with him, a false 
friend, in the hope of some worldly advantages yet to be 
enjoyed? 

Now this probable view is rendered almost certain, 
when we connect with the passage in question the con- 
siderations of the foregoing chapter. 

We are to believe that Judas attached himself to the 
Saviour under the governing desire of sharing that 
worldly exaltation which he believed Jesus would soon 
attain. The other apostles expected such exaltation, 
and desired to share it ; but with Judas this unworthy 
feeling was dominant and supreme, as it was not with 



68 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

the others. "When, then, under the influence of the 
miracle of worldly blessing — the miracle of abundant- 
food — the people prepared to enthrone Jesus as a worldly 
king, what a moment of exultation it must have been 
for Judas ! Even now he beholds his cherished hopes 
bursting into glad fulfillment! And no doubt, if, as 
we have been led to think, the disciples, as a body, 
headed the people in their excited attempt, Judas was 
probably foremost in this matter among the disciples. 
He was the ringleader. His presence was everywhere 
seen, his voice was everywhere heard, directing his 
fellow-disciples and organizing the multitudes, on that 
memorable afternoon. 

And when Jesus interfered, seizing upon the Apostles 
and sending them away, it must have been Judas who 
engaged the special attentions of the Saviour and occa- 
sioned his most authoritative efforts. More reluctantly 
than any of the rest would Judas cease from his attempt; 
more unwillingly leave the scene and retire to the ves- 
sel. And if, in the case of the others, the disappoint- 
ment was keen, and well nigh overwhelming, much 
more would it be so with him. 

No wonder, then, if, when, the next day, Jesus, in 
the most explicit manner, exposed the mistake of those 
who followed him from worldly motives, and gave them 
clearly to understand that he was not a worldly but a 
spiritual Saviour, Judas' mind was made up, and he 
resolved to have nothing further to do with the Saviour 
and his cause than might serve his personal sordid ends. 
And thus would the chosen disciple stand revealed to 
the discerning eye of the Master, as one who was not 
in league with himself; as one who had taken sides 



CRISIS IN JUDAS' HISTORY. 69 

against him and had sold himself to the Wicked 
One. 

The miracle and the discourse of Christ taken to- 
gether, afforded the occasion which discriminated among 
the multitudes the true disciples from the false. And 
these taken together exhibit a juncture critical, in like 
manner, with the false Apostle. Judas, sharing with 
the multitudes in their expectations and their disap- 
pointment by the sea of Galilee, shared also in their 
disgust, and their decision against the Saviour, in the 
synagogue of Capernaum. Nay, if he had been the 
leader in the scheme to enthrone the Saviour, so may 
he have been foremost in the ensuing disaffection 5 for 
when, before Peter's confession, many of his disciples 
said, " This is an hard saying, who can hear it ?" Jesus 
addressed the murmurers with words of admonition, 
adding, " but there are some of you who believe not." 
And the Evangelist continues, showing the. promi- 
nence of Judas herein, " For Jesus knew from the be- 
ginning who they were that believed not, and who should 



XI. 

TJie Person who saw Men as Trees walking not bom blind. 

Mark viii. 22-26 ; John ix. 

The incident here narrated by Mark receives illus- 
tration from that recorded by John, above referred to, 
as will be presently seen, only in a negative way. 

The healing of the blind man at Bethsaida is distin- 
guished from most, if not all the other miracles, by its 
being wrought progressively. It also involved, on the 
part of the Saviour, numerous and peculiar acts. Prob- 
ably these peculiar acts were employed, both to show 
that no fixed mode was essential in the working of mir- 
acles, and also to assist the faith of the blind man, 
which seems to have been very weak. Those who 
brought the man besought Christ " to touch him," as 
though this might be the invariable or even necessary 
mode of performing miraculous cures ; also the man is 
not represented as himself having faith in Jesus, but 
rather it is his friends, who bring him and intercede 
for him, whose faith appears. 

The narrative of the healing is on this wise. " And 
he took the blind man by the hand, and led him out 
of the town ; and when he had spit on his eyes, and put his 
hands upon him, he asked him if he saw aught. And 
he looked up, and said, 'I see men as trees walking. 7 

70 



MEN AS TREES -WALKING. 71 

After that, he put his hands again upon his eyes, and 
made him look up : and he was restored, and saw every 
man clearly." 

The point of special interest, at present, is this ; that 
supposing the man to have been born blind, it would be 
difficult to understand how he should be able, on first 
coming to sight, to judge of the comparative appearance 
of men and of trees, and of the proper motion of walking. 
It is in great measure by experience that we learn how 
the forms of things ought to appear. Persons born blind 
are sometimes brought to sight, through modern surgical 
skill, as in cases of congenital cataract. And it is said 
that the blind, coming for the first time to sight, are 
unable to judge of forms and distances. They cannot, 
simply by sight, distinguish a globe from a cube. They 
must handle these objects in connection with seeing 
them, in order afterward to judge of them aright upon 
simple sight. They have no idea of perspective, all 
things appearing equally near or remote ; and not until 
they have gone freely about, is their vision competently 
instructed to judge of comparative distances. 

We may not indeed limit a miracle. The miracle 
wrought by Peter and John, on the man lame from his 
birth, who lay "at the gate of the temple, which is 
called Beautiful," not only gave strength to "his feet 
and ancle-bones," so that he might of himself have 
afterwards learned to walk, but it also gave the skill 
which is usually acquired by experience, so that " he 
leaping up, stood, and walked, and entered with them 
into the temple, walking and leaping and praising 
God."* 



72 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

Yet, as a general fact, miracles end where natural 
causes may suitably begin. Thus the daughter of Jairus 
was brought to life and health, yet she was not miracu- 
lously strengthened in body. Natural food was sufficient 
to strengthen her, and Jesus " commanded that some- 
thing should be given her to eat." In the case of the 
lame man just mentioned, there was a great moral result 
to be attained, in giving the miracle such extent of 
operation as to enable the man at once and fully to 
exercise his powers. It thus had an effect, which it 
otherwise would not have had, in testifying for the 
risen Saviour and his religion. 

But, in the case before us, not only is there no evi- 
dent reason for giving such extent to the miracle, but 
further, the miracle itself was not completed, when the 
patient " saw men as trees walking." And it does not 
seem natural to suppose that the miracle should have 
conferred the skill of experience, before it had conferred 
the full power of simple vision — the power to see things 
" clearly." 

Yet the whole difficulty, be it observed, is simply 
one of supposition. For the narrative does not state 
nor imply that the man was born blind. It says noth- 
ing directly upon the subject. It does use one word, 
which, in an apparently undesigned way, intimates that 
the man was not born blind. It says that he " was re- 
stored •" as if he had previously lost his vision, and had 
now got it back again. 

Negative proof is sometimes the strongest of all proof. 
It is common, with the Scripture writers, to exhibit the 
most desperate features in the case of those on whom 
miracles were performed, doubtless in order that the 



MEN AS TREES WALKING. 73 

reality and the wonderful character of the miracles 
might be sufficiently made evident. Thus it is stated 
that the infirm man at the pool of Bethesda had been 
afflicted thirty and eight years ; that the woman with 
an issue of blood had suffered for twelve years, and had 
spent her whole living on physicians in vain ; and that 
Lazarus had been dead four days.* And not only 
might we naturally suppose that it would have been a 
circumstance worth mentioning, if this man had been 
born blind, but we find that, in the case recorded in the 
ninth of John above cited, this fact is distinctly and 
repeatedly referred to, throughout the chapter, as one 
of the notable features of the case. The statement is 
not only made at the beginning of the chapter, that the 
man "was blind from his birth." This might have 
been done because of the ensuing conversation, in which 
Christ answered the question of his disciples, " Master, 
who did sin, this man or his parents, that he was born 
blind ?" But afterward the Jews demand of the pa- 
rents, " Is this your son, who ye say was born blind f " 
And the parents respond, " We know that this is our 
son, and that he was born blind." And the man him- 
self exclaims, " Since the world began, was it not heard 
that any man opened the eyes of one that was born 
blind." 

Now, how vastly easy would it have been for an in- 
ventor of history, or even for a truthful but careless 
historian, to have represented the man of Bethsaida as 
born blind, and thus unconsciously afforded the difficulty 
above presented. But the Scripture records are not in- 

* John v. 5 ; Mark v. 25, 26; John xi. 39. 
7 D 



74 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

ventions ; neither are they the product of mere honest 
blunderers. Rather they recount actual occurrences, 
even when these are stupendous miracles; and they are 
minutely truthful, even as such "undesigned coinci- 
dences" most forcibly testify. 



XII. 

The Opening of a New Era in the Ministry of Christ. 

Matthew xvi. 21, and its parallels. 

By consulting the passages cited, it will be seen that 
our Saviour now explicitly foretold his death and res- 
urrection. He taught "his disciples," not the people 
generally, that he "must suffer many things," be "re- 
jected" by the chiefs of the nation, be put to death, 
and "be raised again the third day." He represented 
this dread consummation as awaiting him in Jerusalem, 
and declared that under the sublime necessity of his 
mission, he "must go unto Jerusalem" to meet it. 

It is important to understand that this teaching was 
something new to the disciples, and further, that Jesus 
now began this teaching, to continue it at intervals 
until the predicted consummation was actually reached. 
Indeed, we need to understand that a new era in the life 
and ministry of our Saviour was now opening, in which 
his coming sufferings and death were to be held con- 
spicuously in view, and in which his movements were 
to be governed, to an extent not before seen, by the an- 
ticipation of them.* 

«Bengel in loco observes, "The Gospel may be divided into two parts, 
from which the Divine plan of Jesus shines forth. The first proposition 
is, Jesus is the Christ ; the second, Christ must suffer, die, and rise again, 
or more briefly, Christ by death will enter into glory. Jesus first convinced 

75 



76 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

The fact that this teaching was something new, would 
sufficiently appear from the language of our Saviour 
here employed, if we Avould but give his expressions 
their due significance. Mark writes, that "he began to 
teach them that the Son of man must suffer many 
things." Our Lord, before this, had given some 
obscure hints upon this subject, but now his teachings 
Avere clear and explicit.* This is also expressed by 
Mark, when he further writes, "And he spake that say- 
ing openly." Matthew looks to the new era which was 
now commencing, when he says, "From that time forth 
began Jesus to show unto his disciples," etc. While 
hitherto the subject of his passion had been referred to, 
only in the way of brief and casual intimations, it was 
now to become a frequent and prominent theme of dis- 
course. 

The fact that this teaching was new to the disciples, 
appears also from their manner of receiving it. It 
took them by surprise. It excited the profoundest 
emotions. It presented their Master and his mission in 
a strange and painful light. 

We have had occasion already to observe Peter's con- 
duct on this announcement of our Saviour; how, una- 
ble to endure it, he took the Master aside, and ventured 
not only to remonstrate with him but even to rebuke 
him.f ~No doubt this feeling of Peter was shared by 
his companions. The thought of a suffering and re- 
ins disciples of the first proposition ; in consequence of which they were 
bound to believe him concerning the second, even before his passion. As 
soon as Jesus had persuaded his disciples of the first proposition, he added 
the second." 

* John iii. 14. Matt. x. 38, etc. f See page 25. 



new era in Christ's ministry. 77 

jected Messiah was wholly foreign to their minds. 
They had been so far enlightened concerning the person 
of Christ, as to be able to make that confident acknow- 
ledgment of him, recorded just before Jesus began this 
new teaching, when, to the question of the Master, 
"But who do ye say that I am?" Peter answered, 
"Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." Yet 
they regarded Christ chiefly in the light of a prophet 
and of a king. They had not yet apprehended him in 
his priestly character. 

Now, what we have said above, receives full illustra- 
tion from the history. By comparing the evangelic 
records prior to this time, with those which follow, we 
may readily see that now a new chapter was opened in 
the ministry of Christ. We may see that the anticipa- 
tion of his dreadful trials and bloody passion, not only 
led the Saviour, from this time forth, to speak with his 
disciples on this subject, in occasional and formal in- 
structions, but also tinged his various thoughts, affected 
his various movements, and brought to him peculiar 
experiences, thus giving distinct character to his whole 
subsequent ministry. 

It may be enough for us now, remembering the 
absence of explicit teachings hitherto concerning Christ's 
passion, to instance a few passages, in the subsequent 
history, in which the subject is distinctly treated. 

Only a week after Jesus began this new instruction, 
occurred his transfiguration. In this sublime event we 
behold one of those peculiar experiences of the Saviour, 
just referred to, granted him in view of his coming 
humiliation. Likewise it had for the disciples an im- 
portant teaching, as we shall by and by show. But in 



78 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

connection with this event, our Saviour is found mak- 
ing, to the three disciples who attended him, a distinct 
reference to his death and resurrection. "As they came 
down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, 
Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of Man be 
risen again from the dead." One of the Evangelists in- 
forms us that the disciples " kept that saying with them- 
selves, questioning one with another what the rising 
from the dead should mean." (Mark.) And further, 
in answer to the question of the disciples, "Why say 
the Scribes that Elias must first come?" Jesus "answered 
and told them, Elias verily cometh first and restoreth 
all things; and how it is written of the Son of Man, 
that he must suffer many things, and be set at nought." 
Here it is seen, that the theme upon which Jesus began 
to teach, just after Peter's noble confession, was 
speedily resumed again. 

Yet only three of the Apostles witnessed the trans- 
figuration, and heard the instruction given in connection 
with it. Soon after this, however, indeed the very next 
day, as appears from Luke's narrative, — Jesus teaches 
the same lesson, in explicit terms, to the whole company 
of the Twelve.* 

Leaving the region of Cesarea Philippi, the scene of 
his transfiguration and of his healing the demoniac boy, 
and journeying into Galilee, he introduces the subject, 
in connection with his former miracle. The people had 
greatly wondered over that miracle. They seem to have 
uttered their admiration in unwonted applauses. And 
Jesus, amidst the echoes of these applauses, admonishes 
his disciples of his coming humiliation and death. He 

*See Matt. xvii. 22, 23, and its parallels. 



new era in Christ's ministry. 79 

says, "Let these sayings sink down into your ears: for 
the Son of man shall be delivered into the hands of 
men." (Luke.) The time was at hand in which such 
tokens of his Almighty power as had recently been 
exhibited, might be forgotten in his seeming helplessness 
in the hands of his enemies. On the way to Galilee, and 
while sojourning in that country, Jesus remains in seclu- 
sion with his disciples, in order that he may speak with 
them yet more fully. And Matthew and Mark record 
the repeated prediction of his death and resurrection, and 
with Luke intimate the new circumstance of his betrayal 
to his enemies. "The Son of man shall be betrayed into 
the hands of men." Thus plainly did Christ continue 
the teaching which he before "began." The disciples 
very imperfectly understood the true meaning of his 
words; yet they understood enough to be greatly sad- 
dened. The subject was of such mysterious nature that 
they shrank from questioning the Saviour for any ex- 
planation of his meaning.* 

Not long after this, Jesus having for a long time 
avoided Jerusalem, because of the deadly hostility of the 
Jews, secretly goes up to the city, and suddenly throws 

* Remembering the familiarity of the disciples with the Master, it may 
at first seem to us strange that they should hesitate to speak with him 
freely upon this subject. In a comment of singular impressiveness, on 
Mark ix. 32, Alexander observes, that the reticences which we are accus- 
tomed instinctively to practice towards one another, even when most 
familiarly acquainted and tenderly related, are equally difficult of rational 
explanation. The personality of every one is sacred. Nothing stands 
more closely related to our personality than death. There was that in the 
personality of Jesus, the eternal Son of God, yet the mortal Son of man, 
which was awfully mysterious. After the resurrection, Jesus appearing to 
his disciples on the shore of the sea of Galilee, " none of them durst ask 
him, who art thou, knowing that it was the Lord." (John xxi. 12.) 



80 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

himself into the midst of his foes.* He begins that 
ministry in which he is confronted by the chiefs of the 
nation, eager for his destruction. With his life in his 
hand, he attacks Pharisaism in its stronghold, vindicates 
at the National Capital and in the presence of all people, 
his Divine Sonship and Messiahship, even as it behooved 
him to do, before he should die. On this occasion, he 
warns the people that he is to be with them only "a lit- 
tle while."f Having retired for a brief period into 
Perea, and going up thence to Jerusalem for the last 
time, he again, while on the way, takes his disciples 
aside, and admonishes them that the hour of his suffer- 
ings and death is at hand. J 

This further distinct announcement is of peculiar in- 
terest. It was made under a singular stress of feeling, 
on the part of both the Master and his disciples. Mark 
informs us that "they were in the way, going up to Je- 
rusalem; and Jesus went before them: and they were 
amazed; and as they followed, they were afraid. And 
he took again the twelve, and began to tell them what 
things should happen unto him." The prediction is 
now more full than ever. There is an enumeration of 
the indignities which should be committed against him, 
and the statement is made that he shall not only be be- 
trayed to the chiefs of his own nation, but that they in 
turn shall deliver him to the Gentiles, who shall inflict 
the indignities mentioned, and at last put him to death 
by crucifixion. (Matthew.) As before, he clearly foretells 
his resurrection on the third day. And again we are 

* John vii. 10, 14. f John vii. 33. 

\ Matt. xx. 17-19, and its parallels. 



new era in Christ's ministry. 81 

informed by Luke that the disciples failed to compre- 
hend the Saviour's meaning. 

In Jerusalem again, and engaged in his last conflicts 
with his enemies, we find him at one time tasting the 
bitterness of the anticipation of "his hour," — such an 
anticipation as on the night before he suffered had well 
nigh crushed him, and which here brought from him the 
exclamation, " Now is my soul troubled and what shall 
I say?"* Again he warns the people to walk in the 
light while they have the light, lest speedy darkness 
overtake them.f Soon after, he is in the midst of his 
disciples, eating the passover with them, as he had 
greatly desired to do before he should suffer; announc- 
ing that he shall be betrayed by one of their own num- 
ber; instituting the memorial supper; predicting the 
smiting of the Shepherd and the scattering of the flock ; 
giving his last counsels and offering his last intercessory 
prayer; all being speedily followed by the dread events 
of his agony, his arrest, his trial, and his crucifixion. 

Does not this brief survey of our Lord's ministry sub- 
sequent to the time before us, taken in connection with 
the fact that prior to this time no explicit teachings of 
the sort adverted to were given, sufficiently illustrate 
and confirm the statement, that just now commenced a 
new era in his ministry, an era which distinctly contem- 
plated his death? "From that time forth" began 
Jesus, both to show to his disciples his approaching pas- 
sion, now but a few months distant, and also to antici- 
pate and prepare for it, in a more direct way than be- 
fore. 

It may be observed, before dismissing this subject, 

* John xii. 27. f John xii. 35. 

D * 



82 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

that conceiving of our Saviour as now passing from his 
general ministry of active and varied labors, to his 
ministry of suffering — to that ministry in which the 
things of his mysterious passion rose into colossal promi- 
nence, and cast their awful shadow over his life — the 
events immediately preceding and following the an- 
nouncement of our Saviour before us, have a new mean- 
ing. 

The event immediately preceding is that of the dis- 
ciples' distinct and solemn avowal of their faith in the 
Messiahship of Jesus, in contrast with the varying 
opinions of the people concerning him. While some 
said that Jesus was John the Baptist, others that he was 
Elijah, others that he was Jeremiah, or some one of the 
other old prophets returned to life, the disciples, upon 
the challenge of the Master, declared their faith in him 
as none other than the Messiah. And, in the light of 
the foregoing considerations, our Saviour is herein seen 
preparing the minds of his disciples for the announce- 
ment of what will sorely try their faith. It is as if he 
had said, "You are fully convinced that I am the Mes- 
siah: well, I shall now tell you some things which will 
wholly contradict your notions concerning the Messiah, 
and I desire you to have the evidences of my Messiah- 
ship clearly before you, that this new teaching may not 
shake your faith." 

The event immediately following is that of the Trans- 
figuration. Jesus was for a time personally glorified in 
the presence of three of his disciples. Two of the most 
illustrious personages in Jewish history, Moses, the 
founder of the Hebrew Economy, and Elijah, its great 
restorer, were present in glorified form, talking with 



NEW ERA IN CHRIST'S MINISTRY. 83 

Jesus. The sole subject of their conversation, so far as 
we are informed, was " his decease which he should ac- 
complish at Jerusalem." And, in the light of the fore- 
going considerations, how must Peter and his compan- 
ions on the mount have wondered, when they found 
that the subject of Jesus' recent instructions, so unwel- 
come to themselves, was of absorbing interest to these 
distinguished, heavenly guests. And how well adapted 
to correct their false views must have been the discovery 
here made, that the idea of a dying Messiah, which they 
had regarded as foreign to their Scriptures, was, in the 
estimation of the two great representatives of the Law 
and of the Prophets, the grand idea. And how well 
adapted to correct their erroneous conceptions of what 
constituted the proper glory of Christ, to find Jesus all 
intent upon his coming humiliation even unto death, at 
the very moment that he was all radiant with more than 
earthly regal splendor. 



XIII. 

The Transfiguration, occurring at Night. 

Luke ix. 28-36 ; ix. 37. 

Peehaps we most commonly think of the Transfig- 
uration as having occurred in the daytime. The scene, 
no doubt, would have been inconceivably glorious, had 
it occurred even at noonday. The light of heaven, as 
at Paul's conversion, would have outshone the brightness 
of the sun. Yet, in all probability, the Transfiguration 
occurred at night. And so thinking of it, our concep- 
tion of the brilliancy of the scene is enhanced, rather 
than diminished. The light of heaven is then brought 
into contrast with earthly darkness, rather than into 
comparison with earthly light. It might indeed be 
imagined that the appearance of the cloud, in the scene 
of the Transfiguration, would have been more impres- 
sive by daylight than in the darkness ; yet this would 
not have been, unless the cloud itself had been dark, 
which we know was not the fact. It was "a bright 
cloud" which "overshadowed them." The voice of 
God came from this cloud. Symbolical of God's pres- 
ence, it was luminous, like the Shekinah, which over- 
hung the mercy-seat of the ark of the covenant. The 
cloud being thus of bright and burning appearance, Us 
brilliancy, like that of the other parts of the sublime 

84 



JESUS TRANSFIGURED AT NIGHT. 85 

scene, would be enhanced, rather than diminished, by 
appearing in contrast with the darkness of night.* 

Now that the night, rather than the day, witnessed 
this scene, we might infer from two suggestions offered 
by the narrative itself. The first is this ; that, accord- 
ing to Luke's account — Luke being here, as often else- 
where, intent on our Saviour's devotional habits — Jesus 
went up to the mount of Transfiguration for the pur- 
pose of prayer, and was actually transfigured while en- 
gaged in prayer. Luke writes, "he took Peter and 
John and James, and went up into a mountain to pray. 
And as he prayed, the fashion of his countenance was 
altered, and his raiment was white and glistering." 
And the gospel narratives abundantly inform us that it 
was at night that Jesus was accustomed to seek the soli- 
tudes for devotional purposes. f 

" Cold mountains and the midnight air 
Witnessed the fervor of his prayer." 

The other suggestion also comes from a statement pe- 
culiar to Luke's narrative ; to wit, that when the Trans- 
figuration occurred, the disciples were oppressed with 
sleep. They did not, as it seems from the language of 
our version, witness the act of transfiguration. The 
change had already passed upon the Saviour, and the 
heavenly visitants had arrived, when the disciples awoke. 
Possibly the flashings of celestial glory may have awak- 

* Olshattsen observes that the words " overshadowed them " are used 
in regard to the light-cloud, only in so far as it prevented the disciples 
from seeing. The most intense light is equivalent to darkness. Hence, 
in the language of Scripture, the expressions are used synonymously, God 
dwelleth in " light inaccessible," and in " darkness." 

f Matt. xiv. 23, 24; Mark i. 35; Luke vi. 12. 



86 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

ened them.* Luke writes, "But Peter and they that 
were with him were heavy with sleep, and when they 
were awake, they saw his glory, and the two that stood 
with him." Are we not reminded of that night which 
followed not long after this, in which these same three 
Apostles were the only companions of the Saviour, and in 
which, while he prayed, they fell asleep ?f 

Now, connecting with these suggestions which come 
from the narrative, the statement made by Luke follow- 
ing his account of the Transfiguration, to wit, " And it 
came to pass, that on the next day, when they were come 
down from the hill, much people met him," it seems well 
nigh certain that the Transfiguration occurred at night. 

It may be worth a closing observation, that the fact 
that the Evangelist Luke affords all these intimations 
concerning the Transfiguration occurring at night, indi- 
cates that he regarded this circumstance with peculiar 
interest. 

* Alford in loco gives as the proper meaning of the word translated 
" when they were awake," having kept awake, and seems to think that the 
disciples had not fallen asleep. Accepting the translation, the inference 
is not necessary ; but granting both, the argument remains the same for 
its being night-time. Indeed, Alford argues that it was night-time, and 
presents to such an extent the very same line of remark found in this 
chapter, that our view might be thought to have been adopted from him, 
which is not the case. 

f Matt. xxvi. 40-45. 



XIV. 

The Transfiatiration Scene culminating in the Heavenly Voice. 

Matt. xvii. 5-7; ii Peter i. 17, 18. 

Not only did the Transfiguration scene end with the 
coming of the bright cloud which betokened the Divine 
presence, and the issuing of the Divine voice out of its 
bosom, but this was the point of intensest interest to the 
disciples. 

The whole vision of the glorified Jesus and his celes- 
tial attendants was extatic, evoking from the bewildered 
Peter, when it seemed about to end, the exclamation 
intended to stay its ending, "Lord, it is good for us to. 
be here : and let us make three tabernacles ; one for thee, 
and one for Moses, and one for Elias." Yet not so 
profoundly impressive was this sight, as was that which 
followed. This we may see by a comparison of the 
records. 

Mark informs us that at the time when Peter felt 
constrained to speak, the disciples were "sore afraid." 
Yet impressed as they already were, a still deeper awe 
stole upon them, as they beheld the bright overshadow- 
ing cloud about to envelop them; for Luke writes, 
"they feared as they entered into the cloud."* Yet a 

* Some interpret the expression " they feared as they entered the cloud/' 
that the disciples feared, when Moses and Elias entered the cloud. This 
seems unnatural; and the reason assigned for it by Alford, to wit, that 
if the disciples had entered the cloud, the voice would not have been heard 
" out of the cloud," has little force. 

87 



88 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

still profounder fear oppressed them, when from the 
cloud now surrounding them, came the heavenly testi- 
mony, sounding on the listening ear of night, " This is 
my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased, hear ye 
him;" for Matthew writes, that "when the disciples 
heard it, they fell on their face, and were sore afraid." 
Like John in Patmos, before the majestic apparition of 
the Son of Man, they fell on their faces as dead, being 
directly confronted with the glory of God. And from 
their prostration they did not recover, until Jesus came 
to their relief, reassuring them, much as he did John in 
Patmos, by his touch and his voice. 

And, now, how admirably confirmatory of this account, 
in which the impression of awe is seen to be constantly 
deepening, until at last, with the coming of the Divine 
voice, it is absolutely overpowering, is the statement 
which Peter makes concerning the Transfiguration, many 
years after, when he is shortly to put off his earthly 
tabernacle. 

Few are the personal reminiscences of their intercourse 
with the Saviour, given by the disciples in their epis- 
tolary writings. Yet Peter makes an emphatic appeal 
to this most memorable- occurrence on the mount of 
Transfiguration. And, calling the scene to mind, be it 
observed that he dwells particularly, not on the glory 
which Christ received from his being transfigured in 
person, not on the honor done him by the attendance of 
Moses and Elias, but solely on the honor which God the 
Father gave him, in the voice out of the cloud. " For," 
says the venerable Apostle, speaking as if in vivid view 
of the scene, and in tones suggestive of remaining awe, 
"we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when 



THE HEAVENLY VOICE. 89 

we made known unto you the power and coming of 
our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eye-witnesses of his 
majesty. For he received from God the Father honor 
and glory, when there came such a voice to him from 
the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son in whom 
I am well pleased. And this voice which came from 
heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy 
mount." 



XV. 

TJie Exclamation, " O Faithless and Perverse Generation;" as uttered 
soon after the Transfiguration. 

Matt. xvii. 17 ; 2-9. 

During the temporary absence of Jesus, on the mount 
of Transfiguration, with "the three disciples chosen of 
the twelve," events of great interest were occurring in 
connection with the remaining disciples. 

A man had brought his demoniac son to these dis- 
ciples, and they had made an ineffectual attempt to heal 
him. There were Scribes present who did not fail to 
embrace this opportunity for "questioning with the dis- 
ciples." No doubt these Scribes took advantage of their 
failure, to contest their claim to power over evil spirits, 
and perhaps the like claim of their Master. The poor 
disciples, mortified by their failure and unable to account 
for it,* were evidently hard pressed, when the Master 
opportunely arrives. Soon he transfers the controversy 
from them to himself, and shows himself master of the 
situation, f 

* Matt. xvii. 19, 20. 

f " But as when some great captain, suddenly arriving upon a field of 
battle, where his subordinate lieutenants have well nigh lost the day, and 
brought all into a hopeless confusion, with his eye measures at once the ne- 
cessities of the moment, and with no more than his presence causes the tide 
of victory to turn, and everything to right itself again, so was it now. The 
Lord arrests the advancing and victorious foe ; he addresses himself to the 
Scribes, and saying, 'What question ye with them?' takes the baffled and 
90 



FAITHLESS AND PERVERSE GENERATION. 91 

Before the Scribes could respond to his inquiry, 
"What question ye with them?" a man of the company 
cries out. It is the father of the demoniac, who intro- 
duces and describes the case of his child. As this cry of 
the man is in response to the challenge of Jesus to the 
Scribes, (Mark) the supposition is confirmed that the 
Scribes were questioning the disciples concerning their 
failure with this demoniac. 

The father, prostrating himself before Jesus, (Mat- 
thew) entreats his pity, enforcing his plea with the con- 
sideration that this is his "only child." (Luke.) And 
the case of the child, as the father describes it, is indeed 
lamentable. He was an epileptic, as all the accounts 
show. He was also disordered in his organs of speech 
and of hearing. (Mark.) And, still further, he was 
mentally deranged. (Matthew.) Thus the evil demon, 
in taking possession of the child, had run the whole 
range of its being, occupying every organ of the body 
and ascending the throne of the intellect, and now was 
rioting at will over the whole domain. The father does 
not fail to state that the disciples had measured strength 
with the demon, and had been baffled in their attempts 
to eject him. 

And now there is heard from the Saviour that strange, 
that almost passionate exclamation, which is the object 
of our special attention. Never before have we heard 
from him anything resembling it. All the writers who 
record the miracle wrought in connection with it, are 
careful to give it, using almost the self-same words. He 

hard-pressed disciples under his own protection, implying hy his words, 
' If you have any question, henceforth it must be with me.'" — Trench 
on the Miracles. 



92 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

cries, "O faithless and perverse generation, how long 
shall I be with you ? how long shall I suffer you ?" 

What was it that brought from our Saviour this lan- 
guage ? Endeavoring to answer this question, we may 
find much, in the very circumstances at the moment ex- 
isting, seemingly adapted to provoke the exclamation. 
In view of the whole scene about him, exhibiting a most 
defective faith on the part of his disciples, utter unbelief 
and malignant hostility on the part of the scribes, and 
probably a capricious spirit of curious and blind wonder, 
ready to applaud or decry the Saviour in alternate 
voices, on the part of the people ; — in view of this, the 
generation with whom he had so long labored to such 
little purpose, might well seem faithless and perverse, 
and he might well desire relief from the toils and the 
persecutions which characterized his ministry among 
them. 

Yet frequently before and after this, the Saviour may 
be seen in circumstances apparently as trying, when he 
utters no such word.* May there not have been some- 
thing peculiar in the present case, which we have not yet 
noted ? We think there was, and that the sacred narra- 
tive affords us the opportunity of seeing it. 

Only a short time before this, as we have already ob- 
served, Jesus had begun, more distinctly than ever, to 
anticipate and speak of his coming death.f Now the 
thought of his death was, no doubt, usually attended with 
the distinct anticipation of his heavenly exaltation. 

* The exclamation in Luke xii. 50, "But I have a baptism to be bap- 
tized with, and how am I straitened till it be accomplished," is somewhat 
similar, expressing a holy eagerness to realize the triumphs of his death. 

| Matt. xvi. 21. 



FAITHLESS AND PERVERSE GENERATION. 93 

" Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to 
enter into his glory?" "Who, for the joy that was set 
before him, endured the cross." "The hour is come that 
the Son of Man should be glorified." Thoughts of his 
coming glory, then, had recently been much in the mind 
of Jesus, prior to the occasion before us. Not only so, 
but the very night preceding, he had enjoyed an actual 
experience of heavenly glory on the mount of Transfig- 
uration. Just now he was fresh from the scene of his 
communings with Moses and Elias, and from the re- 
ception of the high honor of his Father's testified appro- 
bation. 

And can we but think that it was the contrast of his 
anticipations of heaven with his experience of earth, and, 
especially, the sudden contrast of his blessed taste of 
heavenly honor and joy with the bitterness of his life 
amidst the dishonors of men, that extorted the cry, not 
only, " O faithless and perverse generation," but, " how 
long shall I be with you, how long shall I suffer you ?" 
As if he had said, " O when shall the time arrive, that, 
these toils and sufferings accomplished, the glory, as of 
the mount of Transfiguration, shall be mine to enjoy, 
without measure and without end ?" 



XVI. 

The Contentions of the Disciples among themselves ; as always con- 
nected with CJirist's Teachings concerning His Death. 

Mark is. 33, 34; x. 35-45; Luke xxii. 24-27. 

Almost every reader of the gospels has, at some time 
or other, observed with surprise, that a disgraceful strife 
among the disciples, as to who of them should be the 
greatest in the kingdom of heaven, arose in close con- 
nection with the distinct instruction of our Saviour, of 
momentous and absorbing concern, in reference to his 
coming sufferings and death. Just when we should 
have expected them to be all intent on Jiis terrible humil- 
iation, predicted to them confidentially and with great 
solemnity", they are only concerned for their own selfish 
exaltation one above another. 

But perhaps it escapes the observation of most readers, 
that these occasions of contention among the disciples, 
which were three in number, invariably followed upon 
such teachings of our Saviour, and that these occasions 
were the only ones in which, after the first announcement, 
our Saviour explicitly predicted to the Twelve his coming 
humiliation. Yet such is the fact. Whenever he spoke 
freely, to the company of his Apostles, of his expected 
humiliation, they began at once to dispute with one an- 
other concerning their expected exaltation. 

We have already reviewed these peculiar teachings 



CONTENTIONS AMONG THE TWELVE. 95 

with relation to another subject.* Let us now glance at 
them in reference to this. 

The first occasion occurred, when they came from 
Cesarea Philippi to Galilee, after the Transfiguration and 
the miracle of healing the demoniac boy.f It would seem 
that it was while they were making their way toward 
Capernaum that Jesus spoke to them plainly of his im- 
pending death. Arriving at Capernaum, (Matthew and 
Mark,) " and being in the house, he asked them, What 
was it that ye disputed among yourselves by the way f 
But they held their peace ; for by the way they had dis- 
puted among themselves, who should be the greatest." 
(Mark.) Then, setting a child in the midst of them, he 
inculcates the lesson of Christian humility. Thus, in 
this instance, stand in close proximity the teaching of 
the Saviour and the peculiar conduct of the disciples, the 
latter evidently following the former. 

On the second occasion, they are going up to Jerusa- 
lem, when Jesus propounds his solemn teaching. J And 
the very next thing of which we read, in Matthew and 
Mark, is the request of James and John — made for them, 
as appears from Matthew, by their mother — that they 
may " sit the one on his right hand and the other on his 
left in his kingdom," and the indignation of the other 
ten at the proceeding. No wonder that Jesus admon- 
ishes the ambitious brothers that they know not what 
they ask, and at once speaks of the cup and the baptism 
of sufferings appointed him. And again, and in very 
impressive language, he inculcates the lesson of humility. 

Pn the third occasion, the time of his appointed suffer- 

* Ch. XII. | Matt. xvii. 22, 23, and parallels. 

% Matt. xx. 17-19, and parallels. 



96 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

ings is at hand. It is only the night before the cruci- 
fixion. They are just sitting down at the passover table.* 
He gives them very express intimations of the near ap- 
proach of his death. He declares, " With desire have I 
desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer." 
And again, as we read, " there was also a strife among 
them, which of them should be accounted the greatest." 
And now he not only inculcates the lesson of humility, 
in language very similar to that employed on the pre- 
ceding occasion, but, as we shall see in a subsequent chap- 
ter, enforces the lesson by that most impressive proceed- 
ing, in Avhich he takes a towel and basin and washes his 
disciples' feet.f 

Now, can we think that this frequent and invariable 
sequence of such peculiar conduct upon such peculiar 
teaching, was wholly fortuitous ? This were in the high- 
est degree improbable. We are almost compelled to 
think that the one was the natural result of the other. 
And looking to ascertain, if we may, this fact, we are led 
into a more impressive, if not a wholly new view, of the 
significance of these portions of the history. 

We must remember, then, that it was the settled con- 
viction of the disciples, that their Master would establish 
a glorious earthly kingdom, and would himself reign 
upon the throne of David his father. Whatever else 
might be true, this to their minds must be true. What- 
ever was inconsistent with this belief must either be re- 
jected, or must be modified into possible harmony with 
this. Christ might tell them of his suffering at the hands 
of men, of his rejection and crucifixion, yet this, in its 
obvious meaning, contradicting their settled convictions, 

* Luke xxii. 14, 15, 24. | John xiii. 1-20 ; Ch. XXVII. 



CONTENTIONS AMONG THE TWELVE. 97 

went with them for little or nothing. They would not 
deny it, yet they supposed it must be understood in some 
hidden and figurative sense, which would permit them 
still to hold their old notions. It must nevertheless be 
true, that Jesus would yet cast off his lowly guise, and 
take to himself his kingly power, and realize his kingly 
character; and when he should sit on his magnificent 
throne, they would be honored above all other men as 
his chief ministers. 

And, in the several teachings of Christ concerning 
what was awaiting him in Jerusalem, while they failed 
to perceive the true meaning of the Master's language, 
they saw in it enough to convince them that a grand crisis 
of some sort was at hand. And whatever else might 
occur to him in this crisis — whatever his strange language 
might mean, concerning his betrayal, his crucifixion, and 
his resurrection — they had the strongest confidence that 
in the crisis he would take his throne and begin his reign. 
He would at that time " restore again the kingdom unto 
Israel." And just in this way, Christ's teachings, even 
concerning his humiliation, would set them upon thoughts 
of the worldly honors which they should enjoy in con- 
nection with his government, and occasion disputings for 
pre-eminence in these. 

As confirmatory of this view, we may observe that the 
pre-eminence which the disciples aspired after is constantly 
conceived of as existing " in the kingdom of heaven," or 
under the Messiah's reign. Thus, on the first three oc- 
casions of their disputing, the controversy does not relate 
to pre-eminence in general. They ask the question, 
" Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven f" And 
Jesus, setting the little child in the midst of them, teaches 
9 E 



y8 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

them that they must humble themselves as little children 
in order to " enter the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew.) 
So it is the ambitious request of James and John, to 
sit, the one on his right hand and the other on his left, 
"in his kingdom," (Matthew,) or "in his glory." (Mark.) 
And, as partially explaining the error of the disciples, 
in adhering to the idea of a glorious worldly kingdom 
for the Messiah, and of honorable positions for themselves 
in that kingdom, even in spite of the Saviour's explicit 
instructions concerning his sufferings, we may observe 
that our Saviour often spoke of his kingdom and his 
glory, in close connection with his teachings concerning 
his humiliation. Thus, after his first announcement of 
his coming sufferings, and his notification to his disciples 
of the necessity of their taking up the cross and following 
him, he adds, " For the Son of Man shall come in the 
glory of his Father, with his angels ; and then shall he 
reward every man according to his works. Verily I say 
unto you, there be some standing here, which shall not 
taste of death, till they see the Son of Man coming in 
his kingdom."* So, just before the first of the three oc- 
casions when the disciples disputed with one another, 
Jesus had spoken of the illustrious rewards which they 
should receive as his faithful followers, giving them the 
following distinct and emphatic assurance, " Yerily I say 
unto you, that ye which have followed me in the regen- 
eration, when the Son of Man shall sit in the throne of 
his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones judging 
the twelve tribes of Israel."t And* at the passover table, 
not only did he say, " With desire have I desired to eat 
this passover with you before I suffer," but also, " I will 

* Matt. xvi. 27, 28, and parallels, f Matt. xix. 27-30, and parallels. 



CONTENTIONS AMONG THE TWELVE. 99 

not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the king- 
dom of God," and " I will not drink of the fruit of the 
vine until the kingdom of God shall come."* 

We cannot, then, greatly wonder that the disciples 
failed to perceive the true meaning of Christ's predictions 
concerning his sufferings. And, failing to perceive the 
true meaning of these predictions, and seeing in them 
only the tokens of a great revolution at hand, we cannot 
greatly wonder that, with their previous views of a literal 
and worldly kingdom of God, they were, with each new 
prediction of the Saviour, stirred to stronger anticipations 
of the setting up of such a kingdom, and to ambitious 
desires for its expected honors. 

It is not inconsistent with what has been said, to sup- 
pose that, in each case of the contentions of the disciples, 
there was something in the circumstances of the moment, 
as well as in the fact of Christ's recent teaching, which 
incited them to controversy. As, in the second case pre- 
sented, the conduct of James and John provoked the 
indignation of the other disciples, so, in the case preceding 
it, there may have been a jealousy existing with the nine 
disciples, for the peculiar favor shown the three who were 
chosen to attend the Saviour on the mount of Transfig- 
uration. Likewise, in the case following it, the dispute 
may have begun with claims for positions of honor at the 
passover table. His teaching occasioned their specula- 
tions on the glorious rewards coming, and the natural 
desire for a superior share of these was provoked to 'ex- 
press itself by the jealousies existing at the time. 

* Luke xxii. 16, 18, 28-30. 



XVII. 

Conduct of the Unbelieving Brethren of Jesus ; as seen on Tivo 
Occasions. 

John vii. 2-10 ; Mark iii. 20, 21, 31-35. 

For eighteen months, as is commonly estimated, Jesus 
had avoided Jerusalem. This he had done, because 
"the Jews sought to kill him." Meanwhile he had 
been prosecuting his ministry in Galilee and the regions 
adjacent. 

The feast of Tabernacles is now to be celebrated, yet, 
it would seem, Jesus shows no sign of leaving his present 
place. He is quietly remaining in Galilee, while all 
around him are intent on the festival and are setting out 
for Jerusalem. " His brethren " are about leaving, and 
they urge him to go likewise. And they would have 
him appear in Jerusalem, as they allege, in order that he 
may publicly exhibit himself. Galilee was but an ob- 
scure, outlying province ; Jerusalem was the great national 
capital, and now gathered the people from far and from 
near. If he desired to make himself known to his 
countrymen, it was, as they argued, unreasonable still to 
avoid publicity. Rather he should court it. He should 
avail himself of the opportunity afforded by the feast, at 
once to procure the national recognition of his claims. 
The language of his brethren is, " Depart hence, and go 
into Judea, that thy disciples also may see the works that 

100 



THE BRETHREN OP JESUS. 101 

thou doest. For there is no man that cloeth anything in 
secret, and he himself seeketh to be known openly. If 
thou do these things, show thyself unto the world." We 
are given, further, distinctly to understand that his breth- 
ren did not credit his claims to be a high messenger from 
God, and that their remonstrance with him at this time 
was prompted by their want of faith. The Evangelist 
adds, " For, neither did his brethren believe on him." 

This remonstrance of the brethren of Jesus has been 
understood in a variety of senses, some of them contradic- 
tory of each other. One class of commentators regard it 
in its most obvious sense, as expressive of a sincere de- 
sire that Jesus should go to Jerusalem and "do his works 
in the temple, and before the priests and rulers; because 
if recognized there, he would be everywhere received." 
Another class regard it as ironical and scornful, as ex- 
pressive of contemptuous skepticism, as taunting him 
with cowardice in not venturing himself in Jerusalem. 
Now, what is the proper sense of the language of the 
brethren of Jesus? 

This passage has a peculiar interest for its bearing on 
that most perplexing question, whether the persons named 
as James and Simon and Judas, in the catalogues of the 
Twelve, were identical with the persons of the same name 
spoken of as our Lord's brethren.* It does not belong 
to our present purpose to discuss this question. Rather 
we would interpret . the passage, without reference to it. 
And we would interpret the passage mainly in the light 
of the history, and especially in the light of the con- 
duct of these same brethren as exhibited on a formei 
occasion. 

* Luke vi. 15, 16; Matt. xiii. 55. 



102 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

His brethren, then, " did not believe on him." With- 
out insisting now on the precise import of these words, 
we may give their general meaning, as made probable by 
the whole history, on this wise. — They held him in sin- 
cere esteem as a near relative who was wholly inoffensive, 
and in the highest degree pure and loving, but they dis- 
credited his claims to be a mighty prophet. Having 
grown up in his company, being thoroughly familiar 
with him in his earthly relations, they failed to recognize 
in him what was Divinely extraordinary. They verified the 
proverb, used by our Saviour, "A prophet is not without 
honor, but in his own country, and among his own kin, 
and in his own house." And therefore they did not at- 
tend upon his ministry. They remained at Nazareth, 
while he was abroad performing his wonderful works, 
and uttering his wonderful words. Now, supposing that 
their want of faith in him was of this sort, are we to be- 
lieve that, on the occasion before us, they sought to force 
Jesus upon greater publicity; or is it more probable that 
they sought to withdraw him even from the publicity in 
which he already lived? The conduct of these brethren, 
as once before shown, may help in the answering of this 
question. And what was that conduct? 

Jesus had fully entered on his Galilean ministry. He 
was journeying from place to place, attended by a great 
throng, working his mightiest miracles and everywhere 
proclaiming the word. "His friends" hear of it. The 
fame of his doings penetrates to Nazareth, where they 
seem to be remaining — in strange apathy and unbelief. 
They hear particularly of the excited multitudes who be- 
siege him at every moment. What they hear rouses 
their latent suspicions, that his enthusiasm has now 



THE BRETHREN OF JESUS. 103 

mounted to the height of positive insanity. And their 
thought is, that it is time for them to interfere and put a 
stop to his proceedings. The language of the record is, 
"And the multitude cometh together again, so that they 
could not so much as eat bread. And when his friends 
heard of it, they went out to lay hold on him : for they 
said, He is beside himself."* Thus setting out, they by- 
and-by reach the place where he is teaching, where the 
multitude is so vast and dense that they cannot get access 
to him. And now we are informed just who these 
"friends" are. The word is passed to him, "Behold 
thy mother, and thy brethren stand without, desiring to 
speak with thee."f 

Here, then, is another glimpse of "his brethren." 
They are unbelieving; and what are they doing? Why 
they are seeking to recall him from publicity, and bring 
him to retirement. 

This being the case, how can we think that farther on 
in his ministry, they, remaining in the same state of 
mind toward him — still unbelieving — should urge an 
opposite course upon him? How can we think* that he 
being comparatively quiet in Galilee, they should really 
desire him to go to Jerusalem, and act the part of a pro- 
fessed prophet in the presence of the assembled nation? 
Does it not rather seem, that now, while he was com- 
paratively quiet, they regarded it as a favorable time to 
approach him again, and to renew the attempt to disen- 
chant him of his delusions concerning himself, and to 
dissuade him from further following his strange manner 
of life? 

* Mark iii. 20, 21. f Mark iii. 32. 



104 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

This interpretation, suggested by the history, admira- 
bly falls in with the language of the brethren, closing 
their remonstrance; "If thou do these things, show thy- 
self to the world." How naturally does this form of ex- 
pression suggest the alternative, that it would be wise for 
him not to "do these things!" How naturally does it 
suggest the thought that the exposure of himself in Je- 
rusalem is proposed by his brethren, only as an argu- 
ment to enforce the necessity of his quitting public life 
altogether ! 

This, then, is our view of the passage in question. 
The unbelieving brethren of Jesus, in their remonstrance 
with him, endeavored to show the inconsistency of his 
course in remaining away from Jerusalem, with his claim 
to be a prophet of God. And this they did, not with the 
desire of having him go to Jerusalem and there assert 
his claim, but with the hope of inducing him to re- 
nounce his assumed character altogether. They meant 
to persuade him that his very dread of appearing in Je- 
rusalem was conclusive proof of his not being a mighty 
prophet. 

We may regard their language as not that of scorn, 
but that of kind rebuke. It is as if they had said, "You 
profess to be sent of God, perhaps to be the Messiah 
himself. Yet you do not venture to submit your claims 
to a public test. You do not place yourself where you 
can realize your vocation. If yours is a Divine mission 
to your countrymen, you need to go before them, at the 
National Capital and, in the most public manner, vindi- 
cate and discharge that mission. This you refuse to do. 
You have assumed a character which you cannot main- 
tain. Now our advice is, either to go up to Jerusalem 



THE BRETHREN OF JESUS. 105 

at once, and make good your claim and perform your 
prophetic work; or, still unwilling to undertake this, to 
abandon these wild notions concerning yourself, and 
this strange manner of conduct, and come home to so- 
ber life." 

B* 



xvm. 

TJie Allegory of the Good ShepJierd ; as connected ivith the Sealing 
of the Man bom blind. 

John ix. ; x. 

The division of the sacred writings into chapters, 
while convenient for reference, is often unhappy in break- 
ing up connections in thought. We can hardly help 
feeling that what has always been presented us, and has 
been read by us, in separate chapters, is disconnected in 
sense. Thus we sometimes miss the continuity of thought 
preserved in successive chapters, and fail to see the con- 
tents of one chapter in the light which its neighbor might 
throw upon it. 

These observations apply emphatically to the division 
of John's gospel between the ninth and tenth chapters. 
The latter opens with the allegory of the Good Shepherd. 
And inasmuch as this begins a new chapter, many per- 
sons fail to perceive that it has any connection with what 
precedes. Yet the allegory was, in all probability, di- 
rectly occasioned by the events detailed in the previous 
chapter, and is all the more forcible when viewed in 
their light. Let us see. 

The ninth chapter is chiefly occupied with an account 
of the man blind from his birth, who was healed by 
Jesus. The Saviour was now in Jerusalem. The time 
is subsequent to the feast of tabernacles. From Galilee 



THE GOOD SHEPHERD. 107 

he has come suddenly, during the feast, into the midst 
of the gathered multitudes, and is now openly vindicat- 
ing his high claims to Divine Sonship and Messiahship 
against the determined and fierce opposition of the chiefs 
of the nation. When he encounters the blind man, who 
is the prominent person in this chapter, he has just 
avoided being stoned by the Jews in the temple. No 
sooner is he out of their reach, than he begins his labors 
anew, saying, " I must work the works of him that sent 
me, while it is day : the night cometh, when no man 
can work." 

All are familiar with the outline of narrative follow- 
ing ; how Jesus, anointing the eyes of the man, sends 
him to wash in the pool of Siloam, which results in his 
cure ; how the man's neighbors, disputing among them- 
selves concerning his identity and his cure, bring him 
to the Pharisees ; how these interrogate, first the man 
and then his parents, regarding the whole matter ; how, 
when the Pharisees denounce Jesus, the man takes 
ground in favor of him, arguing his Divine mission ; 
and how, at last, the incensed and scornful Pharisees 
pass upon the man the dread sentence of excommunica- 
tion from the synagogue and banish him from their 
company as unclean and vile. And few stories of life, 
either inspired or uninspired, so stir our manly sympa- 
thies, as does this account of a poor beggar just emerging 
from life-long blindness, who, confronted with the mag- 
nates of the land singly and alone, deserted even by his 
own parents, harried with examinations and cross-ex- 
aminations, and hearing his benefactor foully calumni- 
ated — the account of this man, in these circumstances, 
maintaining an unbroken, fearless, cheerful spirit, and, 



108 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

with blunt words of honest indignation, tearing in pieces 
the sophistries of his teachers, hurling back their vile 
imputations cast upon his benefactor — stoutly maintain- 
ing his Divine mission ; thus, utterly regardless of per- 
sonal consequences, exasperating them to fury. 

Yet the condition of the man, now driven from the 
synagogue and from society, is indeed deplorable. 
What will become of him? Who will befriend 
him ? Faithful, Avhere so many are faithless, shall he 
have no reward ? A true sheep of the flock of Israel, 
shall he be left to wander, unsheltered and unguided, 
amidst the wilds upon which he is cast ? Not so. A 
friend is at hand. A good Shepherd is near. 

At the time of his working this miracle, Jesus was 
retreating from his enemies for safety. And for a while 
he remains aloof. But when he hears that the man has 
been cast out, he goes in quest of him, at all hazards. 
All along, no doubt, he had well known what was going 
on, and was in lively sympathy with his new disciple, so 
nobly confessing him. " Perhaps in secret he was utter- 
ing, ' with strong crying and tears,' the words of the pro- 
phetic psalm, ' Let not them that wait on thee, O Lord 
God of hosts, be ashamed for my sake ; let none that 
seek thee be confounded for my sake, O God of Israel : 
because for thy sake I have borne reproach, . . . and the 
reproaches of them that reproached thee are fallen upon 
me.' "* And in the young man "were to be fulfilled in 
a very eminent sense those words, 'Blessed are ye when 
men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you 
from their company, and shall reproach you, and cast 
out your name as evil for the Son of Man's sake.' He 

* Prof. Brown's Notes on the Gospels. 



THE GOOD SHEPHERD. 109 

is cast out of the meaner fellowship, to be received into a 
higher. ' When my father and my mother forsake me, 
the Lord will take me up.' "* " Man's extremity is 
God's opportunity," and at the darkest moment of the 
man's trial, Jesus comes upon him, reveals himself as his 
benefactor and the Son of God, and takes the outcast to 
fellowship with himself. 

Now it is in close connection with this whole proceed- 
ing, a proceeding which in the strongest manner exhibits 
both the Jewish Rulers, as exerting their authority to 
the destruction of God's true people, and the Lord Jesus, 
as acting the part of a Saviour and Comforter to such, 
that Jesus utters his famous allegory, in which he pro- 
claims himself the Good Shepherd, and characterizes those 
who have preceded him, as hirelings, thieves, and robbers. 
And does not this whole representation become emphatic, 
in view of the foregoing proceeding ? How true, as seen 
in the case of the blind man and the Saviour, that the 
" sheep hear his voice," and that " he calleth his own 
sheep by name and leadeth them out." How true, as 
seen in the conduct of the Rulers toward the blind man, 
that " the thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, 
and to destroy." 

* Trench on the Miracles. 



XIX. 

The Bequest, " Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my Father (" 
by whom made, atid why refused. 

Matt. viii. 21, 22; Luke ix. 59, 60. 

Professor Blunt, in his "Undesigned Coinci- 
dences," from a comparison of passages in Matthew's 
gospel, infers that this request came from one of the sons 
of Zebedee. The request was certainly made by one "of 
his disciples;" for this is expressly stated; but whether 
the word "disciples" is here to be taken in the strict 
sense of Apostles, or the wider sense of the Seventy, or in 
the still more general sense of all believers, we must 
judge from the circumstances. 

Prof. Blunt argues that this disciple was one of the 
sons of Zebedee, from the fact that before this Zebedee is 
mentioned as living — James and John, at the time of 
their call to the Apostleship, being spoken of as "in a 
ship with Zebedee their father;" while after this, the 
narrative implies that Zebedee was dead — the mother of 
James and John being spoken of, not as the wife of 
Zebedee, but as "the mother of Zebedee's children."* 

Almost fearing, lest he should subject himself to the 
charge of over-refinement, the Professor ventures to infer 
" that the death of Zebedee is here alluded to, [that is, 
in the above request,] and that St. Matthew, without a 

* Compare Matt. iv. 21 ; xx. 20 ; xxvii. 56. 



THE UNSEASONABLE REQUEST. Ill 

wish, perhaps, or thought, either to conceal or express 
the individual, (for there seems no assignable motive for 
his studying to do either,) betrays an event familiar to 
his own mind, in that inadvertent and unobtrusive man- 
ner in which the truth so often comes out." 

Our Saviour's refusal of the disciple's request, and the 
peculiar language in which it was couched, "let the dead 
bury their dead," have occasioned commentators much 
difficulty. Under ordinary circumstances such a request 
would seem perfectly proper. It would be made, indeed, 
as the dictate of filial piety. Why, then, was it now re- 
fused? A recent judicious expositor writes thus ; "The 
reply of our Lord to the young man's request seems 
harsh, but he must have had special reasons for answer- 
ing thus unknown to us."* A further study of this pas- 
sage, in its various relations, elicits, we think, a confirma- 
tion of Blunt's view just given, and at the same time 
helps us in the conjecture of those "special reasons" 
which dictated the Saviour's reply. 

Turning to the parallel passage in Luke, we find that 
while it is not there stated that the request came from 
one " of the disciples," the reply of our Saviour indicates 
that it did come from one who was formally and officially 
attached to his ministry. The reply is, " Let the dead 
bury their dead, but go thou and preach the kingdom." 
The person was evidently an ordained ambassador of 
Christ. Further, that the disciple was one of the Twelve, 
rather than one of the Seventy, seems probable, from the 
fact that, at the time the request was made, the Seventy 
had not yet been commissioned. f Still further, that the 

* Ret. Dr. Nast. Commentary on Matthew and Mark, 
f Luke x. 1. 



112 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

disciple was one of the sons of Zebedee, is suggested by 
the fact that James and John are mentioned by Luke in 
close connection with the request, and at a time when, as 
it appears, the Twelve had been sent out to prepare the 
way for our Saviour's progress toward Jerusalem. James 
and John seem to have been the two disciples who en- 
countered the ill reception at the hands of the Samari- 
tans, going thence to make report to their Master, and 
proposing to call down fire from heaven as Elias did. 
They were probably alone with the Master at the time, 
the rest of the Twelve being absent upon the important 
work recently assigned them. Close upon this incident 
comes the request under discussion, as though offered by 
one of these disciples. 

Yet the inquiry is still more interesting, why did the 
Saviour refuse the request? What were his "special 
reasons ?" If we may suppose that Luke, rather than 
Matthew, records this incident in its true chronological 
order, we may find the answer to this inquiry in the pe- 
culiar circumstances of the Saviour and of his disciples at 
the time the request was made.* 

* There is no good reason for not regarding this incident as recorded in 
its proper place by Luke. Matthew gives it as if occurring at a much 
earlier period of our Lord's ministry; recording it, as Luke also does, in 
connection with the incident of the man saying to Christ, "I will follow 
thee whithersoever thou goest," to whom the Saviour responds, " The 
foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man 
hath not where to lay his head." Luke gives, also, a third similar inci- 
dent, omitted by Matthew. The Harmonists have been much perplexed 
in choosing between the Evangelists, and some of them have gone so far 
as to suppose that the very same incidents occurred twice, at the times 
severally mentioned by the two writers. 

Our view is this : The order, as given by each of the writers is the order 
of actual occurrence, so far as some one of the incidents is concerned. Prob- 
ably the interview with Jesus of " the Scribe," to whom Jesus declared, 



THE UNSEASONABLE REQUEST. 113 

Just now, our Saviour was about starting from Galilee 
to Jerusalem. On the way, lie intended to employ him- 
self in such thorough labors as he had already performed 
in Galilee, where ' he " went about all " the country, 
" teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel 
of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness." 
To facilitate his plan, he made use of his Apostles as her- 
alds, sending them out along the whole front of his ad- 
vance, preaching the kingdom of God. Shortly before 
the incident in question is narrated, we have the following 
statement ; " And it came to pass, when the time was 
come that he should be received up, he steadfastly set his 
face to go up to Jerusalem, and sent messengers before 
his face."* These messengers, who were probably the 
Apostles only, were not, it appears, sufficient for the whole 
work of making ready for him, which he now desired to 
have performed. For we read presently, that "after 
these things, the Lord appointed other Seventy also, and 
sent them two and two before his face, into every city 
and place, whither he himself would come."f Indeed, 
even this number was found to be painfully inadequate 
to the required work ; for our Lord immediately after 

" The foxes have holes," etc., occurred at the time indicated by Matthew, 
when Jesus was about to embark for the farther side of the lake. And 
probably the similar incidents, first, of the disciple who desired to go and 
bury his father, and secondly, of another who wished to go and bid fare- 
well to his friends at home, occurred at the time indicated by Luke. It 
would be altogether natural for an Evangelist, in recording an incident 
occurring at a specified time, to associate with it a similar incident occur- 
ring at a different time. 

It may be added that Prof. Blunt's argument, as stated above, is not 
impaired by the supposition that Luke, rather than Matthew, has recorded 
the incident in question in its true chronological order. 

* Luke ix. 51, 52. f x. 1. 

10 * 



114 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

thus speaks ; " The harvest truly is great, but the labor- 
ers are few ; pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, 
that he would send forth laborers into his harvest."* 
And that his disciples were to " preach the kingdom of 
God," we learn from the commission given to the Sev- 
enty ; the only thing which they were specifically com- 
manded to say being this, " The kingdom of God is come 
nigh unto you."f 

Such, then, were the circumstances under which one 
" of the disciples " made the request that he might be 
permitted to go and bury his father. Whether or not 
this disciple was one of the Twelve, being one who had 
accepted the commission to "preach the kingdom of 
God," and offering his request at the precise time that 
there was an urgent and indispensable need for this 
preaching, " the special reasons " of the Master for refus- 
ing what, in the case of another, or in the case of this 
person at another time, might have been granted, seem 
sufficiently disclosed. Just now, it would be a forsaking 
of the .service of Christ, for one of his disciples to leave 
him on such an errand. Just here, a test of the disciple's 
paramount devotion was reached. Jesus' words must 

* Luke x. 2. 

f Luke x. 9. We follow Robinson's Harmony whenever practicable. In 
this part of the history, we have felt compelled to deviate from it. We would 
place our Lord's final departure from Galilee and the sending out of the Sev- 
enty, subsequent to the feast of tabernacles. (John vii. 2.) For an admirable 
discussion of the chronology here, see " The Life of our Lord upon the 
Earth ; considered in its Historical, Chronological, and Geographical Re- 
lations/' by Samuel J. Andrews. Mr. Andrews very justly remarks, after 
a discussion concerning our Lord's last journey to Jerusalem, that if the 
character of this journey "be correctly stated, it is apparent that to the 
mission of the Seventy a much greater importance must be given than has 
usually been done by Commentators and Harmonists." 



THE UNSEASONABLE REQUEST. 115 

now receive their illustration, " He that loveth father or 
mother more than me, is not worthy of me." 

And well might the disciple commit even the burying 
of his father to such as had assumed no obligations which 
would interfere with the performance of that work. 
Those who sustained no living relations to the kingdom 
of God — those "dead" — might be left to "bury their 
dead." 



XX. 

Christ Heholding the Young Ruler ; as illustrated by His turning 
and looking on Peter. 

Mark x. 21 ; Luke xxii. 61. 

The first three Evangelists narrate the incident of 
Christ's interview with the young Ruler. Each writer 
mentions certain particulars omitted by the others. The 
circumstance referred to in the title of this chapter, is 
given by Mark alone. In the midst of his narrative, 
Mark writes, " Then Jesus beholding him loved him." 

In order that this circumstance may appear in full 
relief, let us review the accounts of the writers up to the 
point at which it is introduced, with some endeavor to 
understand the meaning of our Saviour's procedure as 
therein set forth. 

Matthew, at the outset, is very indefinite ; " And be- 
hold, one came and said unto him." Mark tells us 
where Jesus was. He has informed us before of Jesus 
being "in the house," where he had blessed the little 
children.* Now "he was gone forth into the way," 
probably having resumed his journey toward Jerusalem. 

The action of the person approaching the Saviour, is 
also described by Mark. " There came one running and 
kneeled to him." Luke informs us that this person was 
"a certain ruler" one occupying an important ecclesiastical 

* Vs. 10, 13. 
116 



Christ's look of pity. 117 

position, and it falls out afterward, in Matthew's account, 
that he was a " young man." 

His great question and its answer receive substantially 
the same record, in all the accounts. Addressing the 
Saviour as " Good Master," he asks what he shall do that 
he may inherit eternal life. Jesus, after an intimation 
that the young man's conceptions of spiritual excellence 
are superficial and unworthy, answers his question by 
referring him to the law. " And Jesus said unto him, 
why callest thou me good ? There" is none good but one, 
that is God. Thou knowest the commandments : Do 
not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not 
bear false witness, Defraud not, Honor thy father and 
mother." (Mark.) Only Matthew records the question 
of the ruler, "which" of the commandments? in response 
to which the preceding enumeration is given ; Matthew 
adding, " and thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." 

The Master sends the ruler to the law, not to leave 
him there, but to lead him thence. Jesus will first dis- 
cover to the ruler his self-righteous spirit, and then bring 
him to see and feel that the law, instead of affording any 
encouragement to such a spirit, on the contrary convicts 
of sin and argues the need of a Saviour. 

The question of the young man, "which" of the 
commandments, shows that he regarded obedience to the 
law, as a formal compliance of conduct with the letter of 
the several precepts, rather than a conformity of heart to 
the principles underlying all the precepts. 

Jesus enumerates the commandments of the Second 
table of the law, rather than the First, we may suppose, 
either because these afforded the easier test of character, 
or because the ruler's attention had all along been chiefly 



118 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

directed to these, and he had come to pride himself on 
his unexceptionable performance of social duties. 

And now is brought from him that confession of his 
self-righteous confidence and hope, which, doubtless, the 
Saviour from the first intended to elicit, a confession 
made, as we have every reason to think, in all sincerity 
and with no little self-gratulation, " All these have I kept 
from my youth up." Having recognized in the Galilean 
teacher, one who had great discernment and skill in re- 
ligious things, the young ruler had evidently come to 
him for a confirmation of present hopes, rather than for 
any new light concerning the way of life. He has now 
apparently received his desire, and having declared his 
faithful observance of the law, he sounds the challenge 
as of triumph, "What lack I yet?" This is re- 
corded by Matthew alone, yet is implied by both the 
others. 

Thus has the young man declared his whole heart. 
He stands before the Saviour fully revealed. It is a time 
of intense interest. The Master's soul has been kindling 
with all pure and pitying affections, in proportion as the 
false hopes of the ruler have been gaining strength and 
encouragement.* In faithfulness Jesus must now sorely 

* The intense interest with which the Saviour entered into the case of 
the ruler, is further evident from the energetic expressions which he uses 
when the ruler withdraws. As if viewing with profound sorrow and indig- 
nation the ruinous influence of a love of wealth, he utters one astounding 
exclamation after another — " How hardly shall they that have riches enter 
into the kingdom of God !" " It is easier for a camel to go through the 
eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God I" 
"With men this is impossible." 

Some of the Commentators regard the question, "What lack I yet?" as 
indicative of the feeling of uneasiness and doubt, on the part of the ruler, 
and of a sincere desire to be more fully instructed in the way of life. 



Christ's look of pity. 119 

disappoint and grieve his questioner. He must dissipate 
his cherished self-deceptions. He must, with a single 
breath, blow upon his life-long hopes, and blast them for- 
ever. He will open the true way to eternal life, but how 
narrow is that way — how self-denying — perhaps too much 
so for the disappointed one to be willing to enter it. 

We might have inferred that at this point Jesus would 
be deliberate in his utterances. We might have known 
that he would not rudely or violently tear away from the 
young ruler even the unworthy hopes with which he had 
deluded himself. And this, which we might have in- 
ferred, is distinctly intimated by the Evangelist Mark. 

Nay more, not only was there a solemn pause in the 
conversation, not only did the eager question, "What 
lack I yet?" remain for a moment unanswered, but that 
moment was occupied by the Saviour in a most signifi- 
cant manner. He turned himself in full upon the young 
man and earnestly surveyed him ; " Then Jesus beholding 
him." 

And here it is that we would adduce the passage from 
the history of Peter's denials of his Master. Would we 
know how unutterably and thrill ingly significant was 
the look of Jesus, we may judge of it from the case of* 
Peter.* What volumes of pity and reproach must have 
been spoken, when "the Lord turned, and looked upon 
Peter," to have instantly brought the disciple to full re- 
collection, and flooded his heart with penitent griefs, and 

(Lange, Stier, Nast, and others.) This, we think, does not so well ac- 
cord with his subsequent conduct, in which he rejects the Saviour's pre- 
scription. 

* The word " beholding," in Mark x. 21, is, in the Greek, a participle 
of the same verb translated "looked," in Luke xxii. 61. 



120 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

sent him forth into the lonely night with tears of bitter 
weeping. And although the look of Jesus, in the case 
of the young ruler, may not have had precisely the same, 
yet it doubtless had an equal significance. And as we 
know, from the conduct of Peter, what was the peculiar 
meaning of the Saviour's look in his case, so we know, 
from the record itself, what was the peculiar meaning of 
the look which Jesus gave the young ruler. For Mark 
writes, "Then Jesus beholding him loved him" The 
volumes now spoken were of pity and compassion. The 
soul of Jesus yearned upon this young man, so sincere, 
so upright, so deferential to himself, so concerned for his 
eternal prospects, yet so fatally mistaken. In that look, 
perhaps, the young man, stirred with strange and pro- 
found emotions, read the coming answer of the Master. 
So did it penetrate and subdue his soul, that when the 
answer came, he had no disposition to question or resist 
its truth. He silently submitted to the terrible loss of all 
his hopes of heaven, being still more deeply attached to 
his great worldly possessions.* 

Jesus' answer is, "One thing thou lack est," bidding 
him distribute his goods to the poor, and engage in the 
self-denying life of a disciple. Matthew writes, "If 
thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give 

* " The Spirit who accompanied the words of Jesus had deeply pene- 
trated his heart, had enlightened the darkness within, had revealed to him 
the true, though hitherto entirely unknown, way of regeneration, and so he 
found himself taken prisoner by the power of the truth. But the chain 
which he carried was too heavy, he could not call forth within his heart 
that free determinate choice in favor of the narrow way, which is abso- 
lutely necessary, and the scarcely opened gate of Paradise closed itself 
again before his weeping eyes." — Olshausen, on Matt. xix. 22. 



Christ's look of pity. 121 

to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven : and 
come, follow me." 

The ruler lacked one thing, but that was vital, to 
everything else. It was not one thing of the same sort 
with the many things which he already possessed, needed 
simply to give completeness to his character. It was not 
a unit which must be added to the ninety-nine before 
possessed, to make a perfect hundred. It was not a lit- 
tle finger, as has sometimes been said, which was want- 
ing, in order to a perfect physical man. Rather, the 
ruler needed a principle to animate his works of right- 
eousness. He was destitute of that true love to God 
which is the life of all obedience to his law. The one 
thing which he lacked was the numeral 1, which pre- 
ceding the ciphers, 00, worthless in themselves, makes 
them 100. It was not a little finger, needed to com- 
plete the man, but a soul to give life to the body. His 
heart was supremely set on worldly wealth. This was 
the idol on the throne. And therefore the Saviour en- 
joins upon him just that which would sacrifice the idol 
and enthrone the Lord in its stead. 

The language of the Evangelists shows his failure to 
abide the Master's test, and at the same time his con- 
viction of his life-long error. He is "sorrowful," 
(Matthew,) "very sorrowful," (Luke,) "sad" and 
"grieved." (Mark.) And going away, clinging to his 
"great possessions," he calls from the Master the ex- 
clamation, "How hardly shall they that have riches 
enter into the kingdom of God." 
11 F 



XXI. 

Parable of the Laborers in the Vineyard ; as connected with previous 
Teachings. 

Matt. xx. 1-16 ; xix. 16-30. 

The disposition to sever parables from the connection 
in which they are found, and having isolated them to 
try and discover in their every feature and detail a re- 
semblance to some supposed case — this disposition, more 
than anything else, as we believe, hinders the proper 
understanding of the parables. Such a disposition freely 
* indulged, in reference to those incidents and anecdotes 
which, in modern discourse, are most nearly analogous 
to the parables of Scripture, would certainly be fatal to 
any correct understanding of them. 

The parable of the laborers runs thus : " For the king- 
dom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, 
which went out early in the morning to hire laborers 
into his vineyard. And when he had agreed with the 
laborers for a penny a day, he sent them into his vine- 
yard. And he went out about the third hour, and saw 
others standing idle in the market-place, and said unto 
them, Go ye also into the vineyard ; and whatsoever is 
right, I will give you. And they went their way. Again 
he went out about the sixth and ninth hour, and did 
likewise. And about the eleventh hour he went out, and 
found others standing idle, and saith unto them, Why 



PARABLE OF THE LABORERS. 123 

stand ye here all the day idle ? They say unto him, 
Because no man hath hired us. He saith unto them, 
Go ye also into the vineyard ; and whatsoever is right, 
that shall ye receive. So when even was come, the lord 
of the vineyard saith unto his steward, Call the laborers 
and give them their hire, beginning from the last unto 
the first. And when they came that were hired about 
the eleventh hour, they received every man a penny. 
But when the first came, they supposed that they should 
have received more; and they received likewise every 
man a penny. And when they had received it, they 
murmured against the good-man of the house, saying, 
These last have wrought but one hour, and thou hast 
made them equal unto us, which have borne the burden 
and heat of the day. But he answered one of them, and 
said, Friend, I do thee no wrong : didst not thou agree 
with me for a penny ? Take that thine is, and go thy 
way : I will give unto this last, even as unto thee. Is 
it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own ? 
Is thine eye evil because I am good ? So the last shall 
be first, and the first last : for many be called, but few 
chosen." 

This is said to be one of the most difficult of the para- 
bles. And viewed apart from its connection, and regarded 
less for its governing thought than for the supposed sig- 
nificance of its several features, we may readily become 
bewildered in a maze of interpretations suggested by the 
imagination. And we are the more likely to view this 
parable apart from the previous context, with which it 
is vitally connected, for the reason that it is separated 
from that context in the artificial division of the chapters. 
The remarks made on p. 106 apply here with full force. 



124 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

Very many readers, no doubt, have the impression that 
the twentieth chapter of Matthew opens with a wholly 
new subject. 

We desire now, if possible, to obliterate this false im- 
pression. We desire to bridge the chasm which is pro- 
duced by the division of the chapters, and draw the par- 
able to its proper place, in immediate and living connec- 
tion with our Lord's previous teaching. And we would 
seek to understand the parable in the light of that teach- 
ing. For this is one of the instances, in which a view 
of the whole is most important in order to a right under- 
standing of the parts. Here, as often elsewhere, the 
motion of the river's current previously acquired may 
bear the vessel over a shallow passage of the stream, with 
only slight hindrance, when without such motion the 
vessel would have hopelessly grounded.* 

That the parable was meant to illustrate and enforce 
the previous teaching, is evident from two considerations. 
First, the parable opens in a way to indicate it. The 
language is, " For the kingdom of heaven is like unto a 
man," etc. Plainly thus are we advertised of the con- 
nection of the parable with what goes before. In the 
second place, the parable winds up with a distinct refer- 
ence to the saying of our Saviour immediately preceding, 
and with its partial repetition. The closing words of the 
nineteenth of Matthew are these ; " But many that are 

* Meander has some strange remarks on this point. He says, "We 
cannot but suppose that this parable is joined to the words that precede 
and follow by a merely accidental link of connection. The most elaborate 
efforts to harmonize the passages in question with the parable only result 
in destroying its sense, so pregnant with characteristic Christian truth." 
Yet he adds, " The collocation of the parable in Matthew may afford a 
clue to its interpretation." — Life of Christ. 



PARABLE OF THE LABORERS. 125 

first shall be last ; and the last first." And the parable 
thus concludes ; " So the last shall be first and the first 
last ; for many be called, but few chosen." 

Instead, then, of looking at the parable separately, and 
spending our time in conjectures as to who respectively 
are represented by the laborers employed early in the 
morning, and at the different times of day mentioned ; 
instead of trying to reconcile the dissatisfied and selfish 
spirit exhibited by those who had labored the whole day 
with what we know to be the true Christian spirit ; in- 
stead of seeking to explain the equality of rewards in the 
parable consistently with the inequality of rewards which 
the Scriptures teach us to expect in heaven ; instead of 
this, let us look at the great teaching of the previous 
context which the parable was evidently intended to re- 
exhibit and reinforce, and see if, in the view of the cen- 
tral and controlling truths of that teaching, the parable 
may not show an intelligible and impressive harmony.* 

Our Saviour's previous teaching had been given in 
answer to a statement and inquiry made by the Apostle 

* The Commentators are especially perplexed over the " penny." About 
one-half of them interpret it of temporal rewards ; about one-half of eter- 
nal. A difference truly. But why should we interpret it of either ? Why 
should we make puzzles of parables? Were not the parables intended as 
illustrations of truth ? How then can they be regarded as in themselves 
obscure f 

"The meaning of the denary (the penny) is a crux interpretum, and re- 
minds us of what Chrysostom and Maldonatus say in loc., that we must 
not scrupulously press every particular in a parable, but keep always in 
view the general scope. Parables are poetic pictures taken from real life 
for the illustration of the higher truths and realities of the kingdom of 
heaven, and contain with the essential figures some ornamental touches 
which are necessary for the artistic finish, although they may not express 
definitely a corresponding idea or fact in the spiritual world." — Sciiaff 
in Lange, in loco. 

11* 



126 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

Peter. " Then answered Peter, and said unto him, Be- 
hold, we have forsaken all, and followed thee; what 
shall we have therefore ?" Now this question concerning 
the rewards of discipleship was not, in itself considered, 
unworthy. The disciple is expected to have some " re- 
spect unto the recompense of the reward." Our Saviour, 
therefore, does not refuse to answer Peter, but on the 
contrary portrays in most striking language the compen- 
sations of a true Christian self-denial. " And Jesus said 
unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have 
followed me in the regeneration, when the Son of Man 
shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon 
twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. And 
every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sis- 
ters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, 
for my name's sake, shall receive an hundred fold, and 
shall inherit everlasting life." 

Still, it would be easy to ask the question of Peter in 
an improper spirit. There was danger that with such 
inspiring rewards in prospect, some persons might un- 
dertake the Christian life simply with a view to secure 
them — in a selfish and mercenary spirit, rather than in 
the loving spirit of a true disciple. This were a fatal 
error. And hence the caution with which the Saviour 
follows his statements of the Christian's glorious rewards ; 
"But many that are first shall be last; and the last 
first." The reward does not so much depend upon the 
amount of sacrifice made, or service rendered, as upon 
the prompting motive of the disciple. If the Christian 
serves his Master selfishly, less from love than he 
ought, and with an undue regard for advantage, though 
he be first in the matter of privations and toils, he shall 



PARABLE OF THE LABORERS. 127 

be last in the matter of reward ; while he who is truly 
devoted to the Master, being sacrificed in spirit, and 
ready lovingly to endure and labor according to his op- 
portunities, — he, even though few opportunities be af- 
forded him, and he be last in actual self-denials, shall 
be first in the matter of reward. 

Next comes the parable. And regarding it as in- 
tended to enforce the caution just announced, — regarding 
it as intended to impress upon the Christian disciple the 
danger of indulging a selfish, hireling spirit when en- 
couraging himself with the hope of reward, — how per- 
fectly natural does it appear, how beautifully simple, 
how free from all that is perplexing. The Lord may 
do as he will with his own. His bestowments are of 
grace not of debt. Something else than the compara- 
tive amount of service rendered proportions the Chris- 
tian's reward. The enjoyment of high Christian privi- 
lege, exciting selfish hopes but failing to secure the con- 
secration of the heart to God, shall distinguish many 
who will come short of salvation. "So the last shall 
be first, and the first last: for many be called but few 
chosen." 



XXII. 

Clirist's Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem: TJie Ass and her Colt. 

Matt. xxi. 2, 7 ; Mark xi. 2 ; Luke xix. 30. 

Our Saviour coming up to Jerusalem for the last 
time before he suffers, enters the city as a king, amidst 
the acclamations of his loyal people. He does this, we 
may believe, not merely in order that the Scriptures 
may be fulfilled, but under the guidance of that eternal 
and infinite wisdom, which dictated both the prophecies 
of Scripture concerning him and the whole course of his 
actual life. It was doubtless needed that an open 
avowal of his Messiahship, of this impressive yet im- 
plicit sort, should be made at the Sacred Capital and in 
the presence of the Nation, before he should suffer. 
Gradually he had unfolded his character as the Messiah, 
and by implication had claimed to be recognized as 
such; and here the avowal is made so distinctly, that 
all pretence, on the part of those who should reject 
him, of his not claiming to be the Messiah, would be of 
no avail. 

In the account given by the different Evangelists of 
the steps taken preliminary to the public entrance into 
the city, occurs a coincidence evidently unintended, but 
such as indicates the strict accuracy of each Evangelist, 
in narrating what was of special interest to himself or 
what was most suitable for his specific purpose. 

128 



CHRIST RIDING INTO JERUSALEM. 129 

Mark and Luke speak of only one animal, in connec- 
tion with Christ's riding into Jerusalem, and that "a 
colt." It was, too, an unbroken colt; for both writers 
are particular to state that never yet had man sat on it. 
This was doubtless a befitting circumstance in the 
arrangement. The present sacred service could not 
have been becomingly performed by an animal used be- 
fore to common labors. 

Turning now to Matthew, we find that he constantly 
speaks of two animals. "Ye shall find an ass tied, and 
a colt with her: loose them and bring them unto me." 
And it is only from the other Evangelists that we know 
upon which of the animals the Saviour rode, Matthew 
leaving this point undetermined. 

On other occasions, as is well known, Matthew in like 
manner speaks of two objects or persons, where the 
other writers mention but one. Thus, "Coming into 
the country of the Gergesenes, there met him two pos- 
sessed with devils."* The others speak of but one, 
whom we are accustomed from their narratives to call 
the Gadarene demoniac. So Matthew records the heal- 
ing of two blind men at Jericho, where the others speak 
only of Bartimeus.f This peculiarity in Matthew is 
ascribed by some to his former practice of accurately 
noting numbers, in his occupation of accountant. 

But while Matthew thus mentions the fact that the 
mother was taken along with the colt, without intimat- 
ing any reason for it, the statement of the other writers, 
to the effect that the colt was unbroken and hence un- 
accustomed to being separated from its mother, furnishes 
us, although most incidentally, with a very obvious rea- 

* Matt. viii. 28. f Matt. xx. 30. 



130 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

son. The colt separated from its mother would have 
been intractable; especially when called to play an im- 
portant part in a novel and exciting scene. The mother 
being led beside the colt, as Matthew's narrative im- 
plies that it was, no difficulty on this score would proba- 
bly occur. 

Thus the narratives, in a striking yet evidently un- 
designed manner, supplement each other. 

If it be thought that we are refining unduly, it may 
be answered that it is no unimportant matter to detect an 
indication of accurate veracity on the part of the Evan- 
gelists, however nice; and that the nicer the indication 
the more important it is, for the purpose of showing 
their infallible truthfulness. And further, the refine- 
ment in this case is not without a sufficient result; inas- 
much as it enables us to dispense with the supposition 
of a miracle performed on the colt, to make it sufficiently 
manageable. Many Commentators have thought the 
supposition of such a miracle necessary, although the 
records give no hint that any miracle was actually 
wrought. 

We may add, before concluding, that the way in 
which Matthew speaks of the two animals, has curiously 
led him to the apparent assertion of a more literal ful- 
fillment of prophecy than he evidently intended. Mat- 
thew thus writes; "And they brought the ass and the 
colt, and put on them their clothes, and they set him 
thereon." And before this he writes;* "All this was 
done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the 
prophet, saying, Tell ye the daughter of Zion, Behold 
thy King cometh unto thee, meek, and sitting upon an 

* Matt. xxi. 7. 



CHRIST RIDING INTO JERUSALEM. 131 

ass, and a colt, the foal of an ass."* At first sight, we 
might have thought that the prophet had represented the 
King of Zion as riding on two animals, and that Mat- 
thew had spoken of both the ass and her colt, with a 
view of showing the exact fulfillment of the prediction. 
But every Hebrew scholar knows that only one animal 
was intended by the prophet; and it were absurd to 
think that Matthew, himself a Hebrew, would make a 
mistake here. Surely he was as familiar with the paral- 
lelism of Hebrew poetry, as are any of our modern 
critics ! 

* Matt. xsi. 4, 5. 



XXIII. 

Tlie Miracle and the Parable of the Barren Fig-Tree. 

Mark xi. 12-14; Luke xiii. 6-9. 

Our Saviour wrought many miracles of mercy in 
illustration of his gospel of mercy, but only one miracle 
of judgment in illustration of the wrath due to despised 
mercy. Even in this he selected an unconscious object 
for malediction and destruction. 

The miracle of the barren fig-tree thus occurred. 
Jesus was at Jerusalem, teaching daily in the temple 
and spending his nights on the Mount of Olives. The 
people all came to the temple early in the mornings, 
thronging to hear him,* and he, working while the 
day lasted — his night hastening apace — came early into 
the city that he might be about his Father's business. 

It was the next morning after his public entry into 
Jerusalem, that, returning from his night lodgings at 
Bethany, apparently without having breakfasted, he felt 
keenly the pangs of hunger. Seeing in the way a fig- 
tree in full leaf, he came to it, "if haply he might find 
anything thereon" to appease his hunger. But while 
there was an abundance of leaves, giving evidence of 
vigorous life, and, even in advance of the season, rich 
promise of fruit, no fruit was found. It was a barren 
fig-tree. In a few words, not of impatience or anger, 

* Luke xxi. 38. 
132 



THE BARREN FIG-TREE. 133 

though doubtless of deep solemnity, he doomed the tree 
to the perpetual barrenness of death. "Jesus answered 
and said unto it, No man eat fruit of thee hereafter for- 
ever." And soon the judgment took effect. The next 
morning, that tree, so exuberant of a profitless life, 
flourishing in its showy, boastful wealth of leaves, 
was a withered mass, a lifeless stock, "dried up from 
the roots." 

Now how is this miracle to be regarded? No doubt 
we might so conceive of it, that it would seem unworthy 
the Saviour. 

We might conceive of it as exhibiting an ebullition 
of puerile resentment against an unconscious object 
which had innocently occasioned a disappointment. Of 
course there have not been found wanting those who 
were ready to make the most out of the apparently un- 
favorable features of this miracle. 

Were it permitted us, however, to regard this mir- 
acle as mainly intended to teach important truth, 
all difficulty of the sort suggested would instantly van- 
ish. And, as is well known, most interpreters attribute 
to it a symbolic character. They regard it as a parable 
in action, and as emblematical of the fate of the Jewish 
people. And that our Saviour intended the miracle 
thus to be taken, seems highly probable from the fact 
that just now the thought of the nation's approaching 
destruction was evidently dwelling on his mind, and 
from the further fact that the details of the miracle ap- 
ply with remarkable aptness to the principal features 
of Jewish history. 

How often at this time did Jesus show that the im- 
pending doom of his people was prominently in his 

12 



134 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

view. Only the day before, he had wept over Jerusa- 
lem, beholding with prophetic eye her desolations, 
"because she knew not the time of her visitation." 
And the day after, he warned the rulers that " the king- 
dom of God should be taken from them and given to a 
nation bringing forth the fruits thereof"* and portrayed 
to his disciples at length the downfall of the Jewish 
State. And the details of the parable are apt for this 
symbolic teaching. The Jewish people gave abundant 
signs of religious life. They were blessed with all 
manner of religious privileges, and they made all man- 
ner of religious professions. Those who beheld them 
from afar expected to find among them the fruits of 
religious living, upon a near approach and acquaintance. 
Yet their religion was all show and boast — like the pro- 
duce of the fruitless fig-tree. They were without profit 
toward God, and cumbered the ground. 

The symbolic character of the miracle is thus seen to 
be probable. Yet would it not be gratifying to have 
this confirmed ? But how can we expect it to be con- 
firmed ? As intimated by the title of this chapter, we 
are disposed to connect the miracle with the parable of 
the barren fig-tree. And while, apart from any connec- 
tion of the two, we may reasonably attach the symbolic 
meaning to the miracle just stated, it would seem that 

* " If we regard the tree as a symbol of the nation, and the malediction 
as indicative of the nation's doom, until the end of this dispensation, the 
time of the act may be significant. Our Lord had entered Jerusalem, the 
day before, as her king, but he was not received in that character, except 
by the children. The multitudes hailed him only as the prophet of Naz- 
areth, while the rulers plotted against his life. With that day, therefore, 
the day of their national visitation ended, and before he entered the city 
again, he portrayed in the fig-tree the nation's doom." — Jones' Notes on 
Scripture. 



THE BARREN EIG-TREE. 135 

we are almost compelled to do this, if we bring the two 
into connection. And that the miracle was intended to 
be viewed in connection with the parable, appears in the 
highest degree probable, if we consider not merely the 
sameness of the subject — in both cases a fruitless fig-tree 
— but also the fact that the miracle in its symbolic char- 
acter perfectly supplements and completes the parable.* 

Let us glance at the parable, and then see how ad- 
mirably the miracle fits it. 

Jesus had been correcting the false views of his hear- 
ers, who regarded extraordinary calamities as judgments 
from God for particular and aggravated sins. " Sup- 
pose ye," he asks, "that these Galileans," "whose blood 
Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices," " were sinners 
above all the Galileans, because they suffered such 
things ? I tell you, Nay ; but except ye repent, ye shall 
all likewise perish." Again he asks, " Or those eighteen, 
upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, 
think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt 
in Jerusalem ? I tell you, Nay ; but except ye repent, 
ye shall all likewise perish." Just before this, he had 
warned the people, and his enemies with them, of the 
crisis which was at hand, in the history of the nation. 
He demands of them, " Ye hypocrites, ye can discern 

* The good Bishop Hall thus writes : " Besides that, I have learned 
that thou, Saviour, wert wont not to speak only, but to work parables : 
and what was this other than a real parable of thine ? . . . How didst thou 
herein mean to teach thy disciples how much thou hatest an unfruitful 
profession, and what judgments thou mean'st to bring upon that barren 
generation ? Once before hadst thou compared the Jewish nation to a fig- 
tree in the midst of thy vineyard, which, after three years' expectation 
and culture, yielding no fruit, was by thee, the Owner, doomed to a speedy 
excision; noio thou actedat what thou then saidst." — Contemplations in 
loco. 



136 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

the face of the sky and of the earth ; but how is it that 
ye do not discern this time?" And he warns them of 
impending judgment, and of the necessity of prompt 
measures in order to avoid it.* 

Thus, then, just preceding the parable of the barren 
fig-tree, Jesus pictures the Jewish people as exposed to 
the imminent judgments of God, the sword of Pilate 
ever gleaming before their eyes ready to pierce them, 
the crumbling tower of Siloam ever overhanging them 
ready to fall in crushing destruction. And judgment is 
stayed, to give space for repentance. It will come in 
all its destructive fury, unless averted by repentance. 
" Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish."f 

Then follows the parable of the fig-tree, for three suc- 
cessive years disappointing the owner of the vineyard, 
and spared from being cut down as cumbering the ground, 
by the urgent intercessions of the dresser of the vineyard, 
yet spared only for a single year, in the hope that re- 
newed and yet more generous culture may result in its 
fruitfulness. " If it bear fruit, well j and if not,- then 
after that thou shalt cut it down." 

Thus, in the parable, is the want of fruitfulness in 
God's service represented as calling for judgment upon 
the Jewish people. And the parable leaves the people 
with judgment suspended over them, and ready to de- 
scend upon them in case of their continued unfruitful- 
ness. 

The subsequent history shows that the people were 
not brought to repentance. They failed to bring forth 

* Luke xii. 54-59. 

f " Those two calamities then are adduced as slight foretastes of the doom 
prepared for the whole rebellious nation." — Trench on the Parables. 



THE BARREN FIG-TREE. 137 

" fruits meet for repentance." Renewed and increasing 
privilege only stimulated their spiritual pride and self- 
sufficiency and shameless boastings. They were now 
about to consummate their unfaithfulness by the positive 
rejection of the Sent and Son of God, for whose sake 
their nation and their religion existed. Hence the tree 
must be destroyed. The impending judgment must de- 
scend. The intercessor must stand aside, acquiescing 
though sadly in the decree of doom. 

And all this is set forth in the miracle of the fig-tree, 
if we may attribute to it a symbolic character. 

How deeply impressive becomes the miracle thus in- 
terpreted. As if Jesus, standing by the fruitless tree, 
had said to his disciples, " Remember that tree of which 
I told you before, so long fruitless, yet spared another 
year. And here is that tree, vigorous with life under 
its new culture, but fruitless still. The time for judg- 
ment has come." " Let no fruit grow on thee hence- 
forward for ever." 

12 * 



XXIV. 

Christ's Denunciation against the Scribes and Pharisees at differ- 
ent times Compared. 

Matt, xxiii. ; Luke xi. 37-54. 

The Twenty-Third of Matthew is mainly occupied 
with a discourse of the Saviour, of unparalleled severity, 
directed against the leaders of the people. "As he once 
commenced his sermon on the Mount in Galilee with 
pronouncing eight beatitudes, so he closes his last public 
address with pronouncing eight woes on Mount Moriah, 
declaring thereby most distinctly that all manifestation 
of his Divine love and meekness had been in vain, and 
must now give way to stern justice."* 

Were we reading Matthew without note or comment, 
we should probably have no other thought than that 
this thrillingly solemn discourse was actually delivered 
at the time indicated, and substantially in the form here 

* Baumgarten in Nast. "Some have labored to show that there is a 
contrast between the earlier and later utterances of Jesus, indicative of a 
change of feelings and views. This supposition is based on the fact, that 
whilst at his first public appearances blessings fell from his lips, at a later 
period he poured forth denunciations of the cities which had rejected 
him. . . . The only perceivable difference is, that as he drew towards 
the termination of his mission, the ardent love he bore to his people 
expressed itself more frequently and more strongly in the form of grief at 
their perversity, until last of all there burst forth the prophetic warning, 
that their contempt of inward moral redemption must inevitably result in 
outward ruin."— Ullman's Sinlessness of Jesus. 
133 



SCRIBES AND PHARISEES DENOUNCED. 139 

reported. Some expositors, however, tell us that Jesus 
now uttered only a part of what is here recorded, and 
that Matthew, in making his report, — according to an 
alleged habit of that Evangelist, — incorporated similar 
sayings of the Saviour spoken at other times. The dis- 
course as here given may seem to be connected and com- 
plete, but this, they tell us, is due to the compiler rather 
than to the author of these sayings. 

The only reason adduced for this opinion, apart from 
the alleged habit of Matthew just mentioned, is the fact 
that Luke, in the passage above cited, has given a dis- 
course of Christ delivered on another occasion, which 
strongly resembles this ; some of the expressions being- 
identical. Now, in regard to Matthew's habit of group- 
ing things similar, we believe it to be greatly exag- 
gerated, f Further, it seems a very insufficient reason 
for rejecting the common view entertained of the unity 
and completeness of this discourse in Matthew, that our 
Saviour is known to have spoken some of the same 
things on another occasion. Why may we not think 
that Christ often repeated his instructions, both as to 
matter and form, moving as he did from place to place, 
and addressing different assemblies of people? And 
why might he not, in a long discourse directed against 
a certain class of persons, repeat some of the same ex- 
pressions before used in another place, in addressing the 
same class of persons ? It were sufficiently absurd to 
take our conceptions of Christ's discourses in this respect 
from those of a parish minister preaching to a stationary 
congregation. Indeed we know that sometimes he did re- 
peat himself; the very same instructions being now and 

* See foot-note, p. 42. 



140 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

then reported by the same Evangelist, as spoken at dif- 
ferent times and places. Luke himself, in the very 
instance before us, reporting very briefly the discourse 
which Matthew gives at length, repeats almost verbatim 
some of the expressions which he had previously given.* 

But we desire, now, further and especially to show, 
from a comparison of this discourse in Matthew with 
that in Luke, that the two are very different, and that 
the differences are precisely such as the altered circum- 
stances under which the Evangelists represent them to 
have been delivered, seem to have demanded. Thus 
we shall have the best of reasons for rejecting the sup- 
position of compilation on the part of Matthew, and for 
taking the discourse as he reports it for a summary of 
the actual discourse now pronounced by the Saviour. 

It appears sufficiently clear that the denunciations of 
our Lord against the Pharisees, as given in the eleventh 
of Luke, were spoken elsewhere than at Jerusalem. It 
is difficult to determine where he was then performing 
his ministry, whether in Galilee or Perea, yet there is 
no difficulty in determining that he was not in Jerusa- 
lem. He was not, at that time, in the stronghold of 
Pharisaism. And although the exact date of that dis- 
course is uncertain, yet plainly it preceded by a consid- 
erable period the one recorded by Matthew. The op- 
position of the Pharisees to Jesus, had not therefore 
reached its highest pitch of exasperation and malignity. 
From the considerations both of place and time, we 
should expect that discourse of Jesus, however severe 
in itself, to show a comparative mildness. This, as we 
shall presently see, is the case. We would now call 

* Compare Luke xx. 45, 46, and xi. 43. 



SCRIBES AND PHARISEES DENOUNCED. 141 

attention to the fact, that according to Luke, our Saviour 
did not volunteer his denunciations at all. They were 
elicited by the incidents of the occasion, and the remarks 
of those about him. Dining at the house of a Pharisee, 
the host wonders that Jesus " has not first washed before 
dinner." This calls for the first portion of our Saviour's 
utterances, extending through six verses. Then a law- 
yer interposes, with the words, "Master, thus saying 
thou reproachest us also," when Jesus speaks of the sins 
of the lawyers, through seven verses more, ending the 
conversation. 

The discourse in Matthew is nearly three times the 
length of that in Luke. It was spoken at Jerusalem, 
at the end of a series of most animated encounters with 
the Pharisees, and in the very end of Christ's public 
ministry. It was volunteered by the Saviour, as his 
solemn and final testimony against those who, in their 
whole influence, were perverting the people, and who, 
just now, were consummating their plans for the mur- 
der of their Messiah. All things considered, the place, 
the time, the preceding discussions — in which the Sav- 
iour, having met every demand and disposed of every 
ingenious question of his adversaries, shamed them into 
utter silence by a wise question of his own — it seems 
eminently natural and befitting that the Saviour should 
have turned upon these princes of mischievous wicked- 
ness, and, in the presence of the people, pronounced 
upon them just such terrific condemnation as is here 
recorded by Matthew. 

For, let us now observe the sharper severity of his 
rebukes, as here administered. In the former discourse, 
he had said nothing of the greedy avariciousness of the 



142 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

Pharisees. See in what language he now characterizes 
this sin and its consequences : " For ye devour widows' 
* houses, and for a pretence make long prayers : therefore 
ye shall receive the greater damnation." Before, he had 
said nothing of their religious party-zeal. Now, his lan- 
guage of condemnation of this sin is equally energetic 
with that just given : " For ye compass sea and land to 
make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make Mm 
tivo-fold more the child of hell than yourselves." While 
in Luke, the Scribes and Pharisees, when once denounced 
as " hypocrites," are compared to " graves which appear 
not, and the men that walk over them are not aware of 
them," the comparison in "Matthew is that of " whited 
sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but 
are within full of dead men's bones and of all unclean- 
ness." While in Luke, he once addresses the Pharisees 
as " fools," he here repeatedly addresses them as "fools 
and blind;" and it is worthy of note that the word for 
" fool " in the Greek of Luke is a milcl word, signifying 
" mindless " or " unreasoning," while in Matthew it is 
that word of intense moral reproach which, used by us 
concerning a fellow-man, puts us, as our Saviour has 
taught us, in peril of hell-fire.* Only in Matthew oc- 
curs that vehement and ominous appeal, " Ye serpents, 
ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of 
hell ?" And when we remember that John the Baptist 
first used this exact form of address, saying, " O genera- 
tion of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the 
wrath to come," when he saw many of the Pharisees 
and Sadducees coining to his baptism, there seems a pe- 
culiar fitness in our Saviour taking it up just at this 

* Matt. v. 22. 



SCRIBES AND PHARISEES DENOUNCED. 143 

time. For this very day, when these Pharisees, de- 
manding of Jesus by what authority he assumed to act, 
were referred to the baptism of John, they refused to ac- 
knowledge it as of Divine authority.* And, as the 
crowning instance of our Saviour's present enhanced 
severity of denunciation, we may observe that whilst in 
Luke he sometimes uses the exclamation "woe" against 
the Pharisees or lawyers, and once adds " hypocrites ;" 
here in Matthew, the long discourse is mainly sustained 
upon the key-note, " Woe unto you, Scribes and Phari- 
sees, hypocrites." Seven times is this same phrase uttered, 
sounding forth like so many successive blasts from the 
trump of fate. 

It might also be shown that this discourse, of such 
terrible severity, finds an appropriate conclusion in that 
most pathetic lamentation of the Saviour over Jerusalem, 
connected by Matthew with his report of this discourse. 
The conclusion befits the character of the Saviour, the 
character of the discourse, and all the circumstances of 
the occasion. For he is the tender, pitying Redeemer 
still. His wrath is the strange wrath of the lamb. And 
the perverse wickedness of those whom he has just de- 
nounced is hurrying onward not only themselves, but 
the whole people, to a dreadful doom. No wonder that, 
rejected of the nation, the words with which he closes 
his ministry are these ; " O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou 
that killest the prophets and stonest them which are 
sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy 
children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens 
under her wings, and ye would not ! Behold your house 
is left unto you desolate. For I say unto you, ye shall 

* Matt. xxi. 27. 



144 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

not see me henceforth, till ye say, Blessed is he that 
cometh in the name of the Lord." 

Our conclusion is, that just such a discourse as this 
which Matthew records, is in exact harmony with the 
circumstances in which it is represented to have been 
uttered ; and that so far from the similar discourse in 
Luke furnishing any argument against the opinion that 
this in Matthew was delivered substantially as here pre- 
sented, it affords a strong argument in precisely the con- 
trary direction. 



XXV. 

The Anointing of Christ by Mary of Bethany: The Evangelists 
Compared. 

Matt. xxvi. 6-13; Mark xiv. 3-9; John xii. 2-8. 

The time of this occurrence was subsequent to the 
raising of Lazarus, and shortly preceding the Saviour's 
final passover. The supper was given at the house of 
Simon the leper, evidently a familiar friend of the family 
of Bethany. All the members of that family were pres- 
ent, Lazarus sitting at the table, Martha serving the 
guests, and Mary engaged in anointing the Saviour. 

We may first observe the identical differences of char- 
acter, ascribed to the sisters of Bethany by the Evangel- 
ists Luke and John.* In Luke, Martha appears the 
busy, practical, talkative woman, intent on her house- 
keeping, "cumbered about much serving." Mary is 
quiet, retired, receptive ; — " who sat at Jesus' feet and 
heard his words." In the eleventh of John, in the nar- 
rative of the raising of Lazarus, it is Martha who first 
hears of the coining of Jesus to the village, showing that 
she, more than her sister, was in contact with outward 
life. Hearing of his coming, she goes to meet him ; in 
the interview with him exhibiting great self-command 
and great readiness in the expression of her feelings. 

* Luke x. 38-42; John xi. and xii. 
13 G 145 



146 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

Mary, meanwhile, had not heard of the arrival of Jesus. 
She "sat still in the house," apparently absorbed in 
grief. And when, at the bidding of Jesus, she came 
forth to meet him, she could only utter a single excla- 
mation, being dissolved in emotion and falling at his 
feet. And in the twelfth of John, where the sisters re- 
appear, they exhibit precisely the same characteristic 
differences, Martha honoring the Master by an active 
attendance upon him, " serving " the table, and Mary 
testifying to her feelings of profound and grateful love 
by extraordinary acts of devotion, having once more as- 
sumed her blessed station at the feet of Jesus. 

These notices of the sisters, in Luke and in John, have 
no connection with each other, and the differences of 
character in the sisters are in each case brought to view 
in the most casual way, thus rendering the exact agree- 
ment of description all the more striking as a proof of 
the minute truthfulness of the writers. 

Further than this, the fact that Martha, as shown by 
John, still indulged the same active and practical dis- 
position, after the rebuke given her by Jesus and the 
commendation bestowed on her sister, as recorded by 
Luke, is highly suggestive. It intimates that our Lord, 
on that occasion, did not intend a general disparagement 
of Martha's qualities of character in comparison with 
those of Mary, as if he would exalt the contemplative dis- 
position over the active in Christian character ; much less 
that he intended to imply that Martha was not a true 
disciple ; but rather that Martha's busy and careful dis- 
position had, on this particular occasion, become a snare 
to her, leading her to overvalue the mere hospitalities 
of the hour, while Mary, in endeavoring to obtain a 



THE ANOINTING BY MARY. 147 

permanent blessing from the Lord's visit by attending 
on his instructions, had more wisely chosen. 

Let us now review and compare the accounts of the 
anointing given by three of the historians, and observe 
the manner in which they illustrate one another, and 
together present a full picture. Matthew and Mark are 
much alike. John, in many particulars, is unlike either. 

Both Matthew and Mark mention the house as that 
of Simon the leper. John omits this, saying, " there," 
that is, at Bethany, " they made him a supper." Possi- 
bly the family of Bethany had a principal concern in 
providing the entertainment, holding it at the house of 
their friend, as more commodious than their own. John 
alone mentions the names of the family of Bethany, the 
others leaving us in the dark, even concerning the per- 
son who anointed the Saviour. They speak of her most 
indefinitely as " a woman." All the writers tell us of 
the rare worth of the ointment lavished by Mary upon 
her Lord ; yet Matthew omits the designation of " three 
hundred pence," given by Mark and John as its ap- 
proximate value. In the parable of the laborers, we 
find the stipulated wages for a day's work in the vine- 
yard, to be a penny.* Supposing the parable to be in 
accordance with current custom, in this particular, the 
box of ointment is seen to have been regarded as worth 
a working-man's whole year of daily labor. While 
Matthew and Mark speak of Mary's pouring the oint- 
ment on the head of Jesus, as he reclined at the table, 
Mark mentions further her breaking the box, and John 
states that she " anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped 

* Matthew xx. 1-16, 



148 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

his feet with her hair ; and the house was filled with 
the odor of the ointment." 

This beautiful act of devotion was strangely followed 
by a scene of disquiet and angry questioning, in which 
the modest, shrinking Mary was no doubt greatly 
" troubled," and which produced the prompt and au- 
thoritative interference of the Master. The variations 
in the narrative become more important, and still more 
suggestive. Matthew speaks of " his disciples " having 
indignation, when they witnessed the act of Mary. The 
ill feeling seems to have been general among the Twelve. 
Mark, however, writes that " there were some that had 
indignation within themselves," as though only a part 
of the Twelve might have been involved. But John, 
be it observed, mentions only Judas, making him the 
author of the complaint against Mary. " Then saith 
one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, which 
should betray him." There is, of course, no contradic- 
tion here. Evidently the opposition to Mary's act began 
with Judas, and thence spread among the disciples until 
it became general. The question of Judas was echoed 
by one and another, until the whole table was agitated. 

While Matthew and Mark speak of the question about 
the waste of the ointment, all the writers show that the 
alternative proposed by Judas and seconded by the rest, 
was the disposing of the ointment for the benefit of the 
poor. John informs us, too, and that very explicitly, 
that the plea of Judas for the poor was hypocritical ; 
that the real cause of his indignation was not the thought 
that the poor might have been benefitted by the sale of 
the ointment, but the thought that he himself might 
have been advantaged, by the appropriation of a share 



THE ANOINTING BY MARY. 149 

of the proceeds of the sale, according to his custom. 
" This he said, not that he cared for the poor ; but be- 
cause he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what 
was put therein." 

Of course the other disciples could not be charged 
with the hypocrisy of Judas, although they joined in 
his complaint. There was abundant room for an honest 
belief, on the part of the disciples, that the act of Mary 
was mistaken and censurable. The question of Judas 
was most plausible. Even in these days, and with the 
keenly discriminating judgment of the Saviour here 
pronounced in view, Christian people are often found 
taking sides in favor of Judas and against Mary. The 
cases are by no means rare, in which the spirit of a low 
utilitarianism is found ruling the church, exclaiming 
against all costly gifts to the honor of the Saviour as so 
much waste ; and equally prevalent is the spirit of a 
false humanitarianism, which makes the relief of the 
poor the supreme religious duty. There were some 
things in which the veteran Apostles of our Lord, dulled 
in- their affections by earth-born expectations and warped 
in their judgments by special reasonings, could be taught 
and rebuked by the conduct of a simple-minded, single- 
hearted woman, who, in an affectionate devotion to the 
person of her Lord, with humble and almost passionate 
gratitude, threw herself at his feet and lavished upon 
him her choicest treasures. 

The Lord speedily comes to the relief of the loving 
but troubled Mary, sternly remonstrating with the dis- 
ciples, approving what she has done, pronouncing it "a 
good work," disclosing the principle upon which the 
lavish employment of Mary's wealth in the manner de- 



150 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

scribed may be justified, even in view of the needs of the 
poor,* and pronouncing that wonderful prophecy of 
honor upon Mary, that " wheresoever this gospel shall 
be preached in the whole world, there shall also this, 
that this woman hath done, be told for a memorial of 
her." 

It is of this prophecy that we desire to say a word, 
before concluding this chapter. Nothing of like form 
is to be found in the whole range of the gospels, or in- 
deed of the whole Bible. The Master seems to have 

• The principle on which Jesus justifies the conduct of Mary, seems to 
be this,- that extraordinary tokens of love and honor done to himself are 
permissible on extraordinary occasions. Mary, feeling her infinite indebt- 
edness to Christ, her brother's deliverer, her own soul's Saviour, and having 
few opportunities to express her grateful love and her desire to honor her 
Lord — not knowing indeed when, if ever, she shall have another such op- 
portunity, had done well to seize and improve this. 

Every one is disposed to give honorable and costly interment to deceased 
friends. The occasion is believed to call for it. We clothe their bodies in 
expensive garments ; we encase them in coffins of beautiful wood — lined 
within and silvered without. We construct for them spacious vaults, or 
erect over them the monumental marble. No one asks, " Why this waste ?" 
although nothing of it can benefit the dead. Thus is it, and thus has it 
been, always and everywhere. Thus was it with the Jews. And this illus- 
tration our Saviour uses, to set forth the propriety of Mary's conduct. 
" She has come to anoint my body beforehand for the burial." " Her anoint- 
ing, under the extraordinary circumstances of the case, truly honors me, 
and is appropriate and commendable, as would be the case if she knew 
that it was the last sad rite, the last pious offering made for my sepulture." 

We do not think that Mary intended her anointing as literally a rite of 
sepulture, as some seem to think. (See Alford.) How could it have this 
character, in her estimation ? Yet the words of the Saviour have an addi- 
tional significance, when we associate them with his death and burial soon 
to occur. It is as if Jesus had said, In the light of these, you will judge of 
this deed of Mary more justly. You will see that Mary did well to embrace 
the opportunity — the only one ever to be afforded her, for expressing her 
grateful love, and honoring me in the extraordinary manner which you 
have witnessed. 



THE ANOINTING BY MARY. 151 

been thoroughly roused to the desirableness of affixing 
the seal of his unmistakable approbation to the deed of 
Mary, so grievously misunderstood by the whole body 
of the Apostles, and of sending down this instance of 
Christian conduct, approved by him against the ex- 
pressed judgment of his disciples, for the perpetual 
and peculiar admiration of his people in all genera- 
tions. 

Now is it not most remarkable that the two Evange- 
lists who record this prediction, and who are thereby 
instrumental in securing its fulfillment, do not mention 
the name of Mary in connection with the prediction, 
nor in any part of their narrative here ? Yet this is the 
case. And, from them alone, we should never have been 
able even to conjecture who was the person so peculiarly 
honored of the Lord. We should have known nothing 
more than that it was "a woman." And is it not 
further remarkable that the Evangelist John, who gives 
the name of Mary in connection with the anointing, 
and thus permits us to associate her name with the 
honorable prediction of Christ, does not himself record 
that prediction? Yet it will be seen, upon examination, 
that he does not make the slightest allusion to it. 

Thus does John's gospel here seem particularly in- 
tended to supplement the others. Who would part 
with the name of Mary of Bethany from this account? 
Who would remove the name from any monument re- 
cording a deserved eulogy? And, in this instance, we 
see Matthew and Mark erecting the monument and 
writing the eulogy, while John comes in with the in- 
scription of the needed name. 



152 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

Her eyes are homes of silent prayer, 
Nor other thought her mind admits, 

But — he was dead, and there he sits, 
And He that brought him back is there. 

Then one deep love doth supersede 
All other — when her ardent gaze 

Roves from the living brother's face. 
And rests upon the Life indeed. 

All subtle thought, all curious fears, 
Borne down by gladness so complete; 

She bows, she bathes the Saviour's feet 
With costly spikenard and with tears. 

Thrice blest whose lives are faithful prayers, 
Whose loves in higher love endure; 

What souls possess themselves so pure, 
Or is there blessedness like theirs? 



XXVI. 

The Resolution of Judas to betray his lord, and its Immediate 
Occasion. 

Luke xxi. 3; John xii. 2-8. 

The Jewish Council, shortly after the raising of 
Lazarus, had formally resolved upon the destruction of 
Jesus.* Again and again, during the few days pre- 
ceding his last passover, they sought to lay hands on 
him as he taught in the temple, but failed of their de- 
sire because of the friendly multitudes who surrounded 
him. Finding themselves thus baffled, they turned their 
attention to more secret measures; "they consulted that 
they might take Jesus by subtilty and kill him." 
They thought it best, however, to postpone the matter 
until after the passover festival, when there would be 
less likelihood of popular interference. " But they said, 
Not on the feast-day, lest there be an uproar among the 
people."f 

For a year Judas had been consorting with Jesus and 
the Apostles only for base purposes.^ No doubt he 
still hoped that Jesus would sooner or later- establish a 
worldly kingdom, in which, as one of the Apostles, he 
might enjoy great worldly honor and emolument. 
Meanwhile his avaricious greed was to some extent 
gratified by frequent purloinings from the company's 

* John xi. 53. f Matt. xxvi. 3-5. J See pp. 89, 90. 

G * 153 



154 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

little purse. Yet we may conceive that Judas antici- 
pated with eager desire the arrival of the period of his 
Master's worldly exaltation, and chafed with impatience 
at its long delay. He had observed, too, we cannot but 
think, the anxiety of the Jewish Rulers to get the 
Master into their hands, and the manner in which they 
had thus far been baffled. "We read now of his going 
privately to the Rulers, and engaging with them to de- 
liver his Master to their power. 

Concerning his crime herein, we need not entertain 
any extreme view. We need not imagine that it was 
not instigated to any extent by malice, nor that it was 
instigated by simple malice. His motives were no 
doubt base and foul, even when not simply malicious ; 
and malice mingled in the entire transaction. His 
avarice found room for exercise, as is evident from the 
account of his dealings with the priests. His first ques- 
tion to them is, " What will ye give me, and I will de- 
liver him unto you?" "And they covenanted with him 
for thirty pieces of silver." Possibly Judas may have 
hoped to precipitate upon his Master the necessity of 
assuming his regal powers, and erecting his throne, by 
the miraculous overthrow of his enemies. Possibly he 
may not have distinctly contemplated the death of his 
Master as the consequence of betrayal. Or, in the 
event of his Master's death, perhaps he thought of that 
strange saying of Christ, that in his being put to death 
"all things that are written by the prophets concerning 
the Son of man shall be accomplished." Judas may 
have reasoned thus; "even if he should be killed, it is 
only what he seems to expect, only what he consents to, 
only what he says has been predicted and predetermined. 



THE BETRAYER RESOLVED. 155 

My agency in delivering him to the priests, then, can 
make no difference." It seems to have been some such 
thought that Jesus addressed, when afterward he de- 
clared, in the presence of Judas, "The Son of man in- 
deed goeth, as it is written of him : but wo to the man 
by whom the Son of man is betrayed! Good were it 
for that man if he had never been born."* 

Yet mingling with and underlying all that was ava- 
ricious and selfish in the motives of Judas, in his act of 
treachery, was a diabolical malice. Judas was now turned 
in heart to be an enemy of Jesus. He had come to dis- 
like or even hate the Saviour, and could take ready part 
against him with those who sought his life. This the 
record plainly intimates. " Then," says Luke, " entered 
Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number 
of the Twelve. And he went his way and communed 
with the chief priests." Judas submitted himself to the 
power of the Wicked One, and acted in the spirit of the 
Prince of Hate, when he betrayed his Saviour to his 
foes. 

The language of the record suggests the sudden com- 
ing of a critical moment in the history of Judas ; " Then 
entered Satan into Judas." Perhaps the false Apostle 
had often before dimly thought of betraying his Master, 
at some indefinite future time. But now he is fully re- 
solved at once to undertake it. Satan may often before 
have prompted Judas, but now he takes possession of 
him and controls him. 

It is most interesting to mark not only the critical pe- 
riods in the life of this most wretched man, but also the 
evident occasions of their occurrence. Already we have 

* Mark xiv. 21, and parallels. 



156 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

considered one such period and its occasion ; now we 
may observe another. For not only does the record, as 
we have noticed, here suggest a crisis in the history of 
Judas, but a comparison of the different writers enables 
us to discern a most natural occasion for it. Let us 
see. 

Luke writes, as already quoted, " Then entered Satan 
into Judas." The question is, When? Bringing Luke 
into comparison with Matthew and Mark, we find that 
the time is just subsequent to the supper at Bethany.* 
Luke omits all reference to this supper, probably because 
elsewhere he records a transaction similar to that which 
this involves.f Thus, reading the narrative of Luke by 
itself, Ave should never imagine that the entrance of Satan 
into Judas had any connection with the occurrences of 
the supper. But what occasion for this was afforded by 
any of those occurrences ? Surely it is not difficult, in 
the light of what is said in the last chapter, to perceive 
an easy occasion. 

The anointing of our Saviour by Mary, as we have 
seen, was the chief incident of the supper. We have 
observed the angry commotion aroused against Mary, at 
the instance Of Judas. We have observed the prompt 
and energetic interference of Jesus, sternly rebuking his 
disciples and honoring Mary. A little reflection on these 

* We follow the order of Matthew and Mark, rather than that of John. 
There is nothing in the records decisive of the question of order, as be- 
tween the Evangelists, and it makes no difference, so far as the line of re- 
mark made in the chapter is concerned, which Evangelist we follow. Al- 
ford is too positive, when, on Matt. xxvi. 6, he observes, " This history 
of the anointing of our Lord is here inserted out of its chronological place. 
It occurred six days before the passover." 

f Luke vii. 36-50. 



THE BETRAYER RESOLVED. 157 

particulars will reveal a sufficient occasion for the crisis 
which so soon was reached in the life of Judas. 

In the first place, it is plain that Judas was prominent 
and earnest in this scene. John's account fully implies 
this. It was he who began the controversy with Mary, 
and his first utterance was an outburst of indignation. 
The earnestness of Judas might also be inferred from the 
fact that Mary's act was dictated by a spirit in total con- 
trast and thorough antagonism with that of Judas. His 
cold, selfish heart not only could not approve, but utterly 
abhorred, her beautiful act of self-oblivious, self-sacrific- 
ing devotion. Moreover, he probably uttered his re- 
monstrance against Mary with great assurance, having, 
as he supposed, an unanswerable argument in the obliga- 
tion to relieve the poor, and receiving the countenance 
and concurrence of his fellow-disciples. Thus was Judas 
personally and publicly committed in his controversy 
with Mary. 

The controversy, too, it ought to be observed, bore, in 
no very indirect way, against the Saviour, as well as 
against his loving disciple. The anointing was performed 
on his person, was intended to do him honor, and as 
such was permitted by him. The controversy, sifted to 
the bottom, will appear very much as a personal conflict 
between Judas and his Master. 

Bearing this in mind, and then seeing how promptly, 
how decisively, Jesus takes the side of Mary and opposes 
Judas, rebuking him, tearing his specious argument in 
pieces, and loading with everlasting honor her whom 
Judas sought to cover with reproach, is it not evident 
that Judas must have been to the last degree humiliated 
and mortified ? While his fellow-disciples were all put 

14 



158 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

to shame, his head must have hung lowest, his spirit 
must have been cut deepest. And how natural, especially 
when the controversy had been so nearly of a personal 
sort, that with his feeling of intense shame should have 
risen the kindlings of angry resentment against Jesus! 
And now, ah, fit opportunity ! Satan enters and turns 
the resentment into bitter malice. And though never 
before resolved, it is easy for him now, with unflinching, 
hateful purpose, to seek the enemies of his Master, that 
in forwarding their plans he may revenge himself. 

All this seems natural ; the deductions are not forced. 
Yet reviewing them, let us observe the circuitous way 
by which we have been led, and the incidental manner 
in which our conclusions are established. 

The Evangelist John, who alone tells us that Judas 
was specially displeased with Mary's act, alone omits to 
tell us that Judas now went to the priests to betray his 
Master. John enables us to see how Judas might now 
have been provoked to the deed of treachery, yet he says 
nothing here concerning the treachery. — Matthew and 
Mark, both of whom speak of Judas going to the priests 
immediately after the supper at Bethany, do not mention 
Judas in their account of the supper, and give us no clue 
to the probable reason for his resolving on the act of 
betrayal just at this time. — Luke, as already seen, omit- 
ting the account of the supper, and of course all reference 
to the particular conduct of Judas at the supper, nar- 
rates, j ust as do Matthew and Mark, his going to the 
priests, but prefaces his account with the words, " then 
entered Satan into Judas," without explanation. 

Yet the partial narratives when put together have a 
completeness. Luke assures us of a crisis in Judas' life. 



THE BETRAYER RESOLVED. 159 

Matthew and Mark inform us when it came. John tells 
us how it came. — Luke avers that " then Satan entered 
into Judas." We ask, When did this occur ? and Mat- 
thew and Mark answer, In connection with the anointing 
at Bethany. We ask again, What occasion did the an- 
ointing give for such a crisis? and John answers, It was 
our Saviour's withering rebuke of Judas. 



XXVII. 

Clvrist's saying, " I am among you as he that Serveth," and Sis 
Washing the Disciples' Feet. 

Luke xxii. 27 ; John xiii. 1-17. 

Already we have observed the contention among the 
disciples for pre-eminence at the last passover supper. 
This unseemly and strange conduct we have accounted 
for as resulting from our Saviour's teaching concerning 
the consummation of his ministry now at hand.* 

The contention here began just as they were seating 
themselves at table, and probably first took the form of 
rival claims for positions of honor at the table. The 
strong desire for such positions, was, in general with our 
Saviour's contemporaries, a more notable matter than we, 
with our habits, can easily imagine. One of the special 
sins of the Pharisees denounced by Christ was that of 
" loving the uppermost rooms " or places, " at feasts."f 
And one of our Lord's parables was spoken, when, din- 
ing with one of the Pharisees, " he marked how they 
chose out the chief rooms."| The strife among the dis- 
ciples, arising upon the occasion mentioned, and at first 
having respect to the honorable places at the table, no 
doubt before it was done included their general claims 
to places of dignity in the coming kingdom of the Mes- 
siah. There was probably an earnest canvass of merits, 

* See Ch. XVI. | Matt - xxiii - 6 - t Luke xiv - ?• 

160 



THE FEET-WASHING. 161 

each pressing his own claims. The contention would be 
the more warm, if, as we may think not impossible, they 
imagined that this supper was to be signalized by some 
advance step being taken, in connection with it, toward 
the inauguration of the kingdom of God.* Luke writes, 
" And there was also a strife among them, which of them 
should be the greatest." 

Jesus of course does not permit the occurrence to pass 
unnoticed. He interposes, with words of gentle but firm 
remonstrance. He tells them, much as he had done once 
before, that while " the Kings of the Gentiles exercise lord- 
ship over them ; and they that exercise authority upon 
them are accounted Benefactors," it shall not be so in 
his kingdom and amongst his disciples.f On the con- 
trary, " he that is greatest among you, let him be as the 
younger ; and he that is chief as he that doth serve." 
And, as before, he cites his own example, representing 
himself as a servant of others. He asks, " whether is 
greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth ?" and 
adds, in words whose full significance we shall presently 
perceive, " but I am among you as he that serveth." 

This rebuke of the Saviour perhaps seems to us, in 
view of all the circumstances, strangely mild. This was 
now the third time that the disciples had been guilty of 
the same misdemeanor.^ On both previous occasions 
the Master had remonstrated with them. Would it not 
appear that their grievous fault, thus persisted in, de- 
manded from the Saviour something more than the sim- 
ple repetition of former remonstrance ? Would it not 
have been manifestly appropriate, if the Saviour had 
embraced the present opportunity, so to rebuke the vain 

* Luke xxii. 16, IS. f Matt. xx. 25-28. J Ch. XVI. 

14 * 



162 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

aspirings of his disciples, that they would never be likely 
to fall again into their present error, and to impress upon 
their hearts a lesson of humility utterly indelible ? We 
could not of course affirm beforehand that our Saviour 
ought to have done this, yet we can see that if he had 
chosen to do this, it would have seemed every way ap- 
propriate to the circumstances. 

Well, bringing the gospel by John into proper rela- 
tions with that of Luke, we find that Jesus actually did 
what we have supposed he might most suitably have 
done. We find that his words in Luke, "but I am 
among you as he that serveth," have reference not merely 
to his general work of humility, but to a specific service 
which at that moment he undertakes. We find that for 
a little Jesus was literally not " sitting at meat," but 
moving among his disciples, performing an office of all 
others most servant-like. 

The narrative of the feet-washing given in John, as 
all i may readily see, comes in at the beginning of the 
passover-meal, and hence is to be placed in juxtaposition 
with the narrative before us in Luke. We encounter 
here, indeed, a most unfortunate mistranslation in John, 
which often prevents the English reader from perceiving 
the proper connection. We read that "supper being 
ended," Jesus proceeded to wash his disciples' feet.* 
The proper translation is, " supper being made or pre- 
pared." It was the beginning of the meal, rather than 
the close. Not only is this in accordance with the usage 
of the Greek word,f but it is equally in accordance with 
what we know of Oriental custom. The sandals were 
removed and the feet washed, on entering the house and 

* John xiii. 2. f See Alforb's Greek Testament. 



THE FEET-WASHING. 163 

taking the reclining posture at table, rather than when 
the meal was over and the house about to be left. 

Behold then the scene. No one is at hand, as they 
seat themselves at table, to undertake the customary 
grateful but menial office. In the absence of servants, 
some humble disciple might well have volunteered to 
perform, in behalf of his Master and even of his fellow- 
disciples, what would so greatly conduce to their com- 
fort. But no. The thoughts of the disciples are run- 
ning in precisely the opposite direction. Not dreaming 
of the claims or dignity of useful service, they are just 
now at the height of their noisy strife for superior place. 
And Jesus, having rebuked them with such language as 
we have read, proceeds to impress upon them, by a most 
memorable act, his lesson of humility. 

Rising from the place he had just taken,* he sets about 
the performance of that lowly service for his disciples, 
which none of them had been considerate enough to 
undertake even for himself. He moves silently and with 
great deliberation, deferring any explanation of his con- 
duct until he is done. He lays aside his upper garments, 
takes a towel, binds it about him, pours water into a 
basin, and comes to his disciples. 

No doubt the noisy debate has ceased. No doubt the 
whole company of the Twelve are looking on in curious 
wonder. Perhaps as they begin to understand what he 
is doing, their cheeks crimson with shame. No marvel 
that when the Master approaches Peter, that outspoken 
disciple exclaims against the proceeding. Jesus persisting 
in the service, and completing it, with the same delibera- 
tion which marked him at the outset, resumes his place 

* Tholuuk vs. Olshausen. 



164 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

at the table, and proceeds to an explanation of his con- 
duct, the terms of which clearly show that it was the 
intention of the Saviour, in what he had done, to rebuke 
the unseemly strife of his disciples. "He said unto them, 
Know ye what I have done to you ? Ye call me Master 
and Lord ; and ye say well ; for so I am. If I then, 
your Lord and Master, have washed your feet ; ye also 
ought to wash one another's feet. For I have given you 
an example, that ye should do as I have done to you. 
Verily, verily I say unto you, The servant is not greater 
than his Lord ; neither he that is sent greater than he 
that sent him. If ye know these things, happy are ye 
if ye do them." 

Thus does the narrative in John incidentally explain 
and enforce the narrative in Luke, while, at the same 
time, as the readers of John's gospel may readily see, it 
directly serves the special purpose of that Evangelist ; 
his gospel having a completeness of its own, while often 
supplementing the others. . And thus do the narratives 
combined present a fuller picture of a most interesting 
scene in the Saviour's ministry than is afforded by either 
of them separately. 



XXVIII. 

Position of Judas at the Passover Table. 
Matt. xxvi. 21-25; Mark xiv. 18-21; Luke xxii. 21-23; John xiii. 21-31. 

The designation by Jesus of the betrayer at the pass- 
over table, is recorded with a variety of details by the 
several Evangelists. In a hurried reading of the different 
writers, one at one time and another at another, these 
details not unfrequently produce confusion, instead of 
serving to bring the whole scene to view with graphic 
clearness. If, however, we will take the trouble to bring 
the accounts together in parallel columns, as is done in 
some of the Harmonies, and will then carefully compare 
the details and arrange them in the probable order of 
actual occurrence, we shall be surprised at the clearness 
and completeness of the representation, and also at some 
of the necessary inferential results.* Let us now exam- 

* Alford, who along with great scholarly learning exhibits an antipathy 
to the Harmonists well nigh puerile, and pushes the idea of the indepen- 
dence of the several Evangelists to an extreme well nigh absurd, thus 
writes on Matt. xxvi. 20-25. " Not that I have any desire to reduce the 
four accounts to a harmonized narrative, for that I believe to be impossi- 
ble, and the attempt wholly unprofitable." It seems much the fashion just 
now to decry all harmonistic study. For this reason we are the more glad 
to find, in the pages of the learned and pious Ellicott, the following; 
" It is much to be feared that the tendency of our more modern study of 
the Gospels is to regard every attempt to harmonize the sacred narrative 
with indifference, if not sometimes even with suspicion. . . . We may with 
justice most strongly urge the extreme importance, not only in a mere 

165 



166 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

ine these details, as they would thus present themselves, 
and observe the results. 

Jesus had already exhibited much feeling, in anticipa- 
tion of the treachery of Judas.* Now, in deep anguish 
of heart, he makes solemn announcement of the fact that 
he shall be betrayed by one of his own disciples ; " He 
was troubled in spirit and testified?'' (John.) 

See the different forms of this announcement, as re- 
ported. They were yet at table. " As they did eat," 
says Matthew. " As they sat and did eat," says Mark. 
Both Matthew and Mark precede the announcement with 
the emphatic, "Verily I say unto you." John, according 
to his custom, uses the double Verily. Luke simply 
says, "Behold." — Matthew and John write, "One of you 
shall betray me." Mark has it, " One of you which eat- 
eth with me shall betray me." Luke varies the expres- 
sion more widely, " The hand of him that betrayeth me 
is with me on the table." 

This announcement fell like a thunderbolt upon the 
little company of the Twelve. They saw a dreadful 
meaning in Jesus' words, which they had failed to see, 
when, in a more indefinite way and mingled with other 
matters, he had predicted his betrayal. f Instantly all 
was the anguish of grief and self-distrust and perplexity. 
"They began to be sorrowful." (Mark.) "They were 
sorrowful." (Matthew.) Unsuspicious of any 



critical, but even in a devotional point of view, of obtaining as complete 
and connected a view of our Lord's life and ministry as can possibly be 
obtained from our existing inspired records. And this, let it be remem- 
bered, can only be done by that patient and thoughtful comparison of 
Scripture with Scripture which now finds such little favor with so many 
theologians of.our present day. — Life op Christ. — Foot-note, p. 216. 
* John xiii. 18-20. f Matt. xx. 18, and parallels. 



JUDAS AT THE PASSOVER TABLE. 167 

one of their number in particular, they " looked on one 
another, doubting of whom he spake;" (John;) "they 
began to inquire among themselves which of them it 
was that should do this thing." (Luke.) And each 
being suspicious of himself rather than of any of his 
fellows, "they began every one to say unto him," (Mat- 
thew,) "one by one," (Mark,) "Lord, is it I?" (Mat- 
thew and Mark.) The confusion of the disciples and 
the distress of the Master mingle in a general excite- 
ment. 

In answer to the question, who the guilty one may 
be, Jesus at first responds only in general terms, that it 
is one of the Twelve that dippeth with him in the dish. 
(Matthew and Mark.) This seems to be only an em- 
phatic repetition of what he had already declared; as 
if he had said, " It is indeed one of you, my professed 
disciples and familiar friends." To John, however, 
who reclined on the bosom of Jesus, and to whom Peter 
had beckoned that he should ask the Lord privately — 
the only apparent object of such a signal — Jesus an- 
swers, no doubt in a voice too low for the others to hear 
— he communicating the answer as quietly as John had 
conveyed the question — "He it is to whom I shall give 
a sop, when I have dipped it." Perhaps while Peter 
was signalling John, the Saviour makes that declaration, 
recorded by Matthew, Mark, and John, of the terrible 
guilt of the betrayer, even though his act instead of 
hindering actually accomplishes the Divine purpose,* 
"The Son of man goeth as it is written of him; but woe 
unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed." 
To this he adds, according to Matthew and Mark, those 

* See p. 155. 



168 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

portentous words, "It had been good for that man if 
he had not been born." 

Judas having somewhat delayed the question which 
the others just now were proposing, and hoping perhaps 
to divert suspicion from himself, now hypocritically asks, 
"Master, is it I?" To this Jesus gives the emphatic 
response, "Thou hast said" — it is indeed you. (Mat- 
thew.) At the same time, Jesus dips a piece of bread 
in the dish and passes it to the traitor. (John.) 

And speedily, as John intimates, Satan, who before 
had been busy with Judas, takes renewed and fuller 
possession of him; "And after the sop Satan entered 
into him." The knowledge that he is discovered of the 
Master, fires his guilty purpose. Jesus perceiving this 
says to him, in a voice which all hear, "That thou doest, 
do quickly," and he hastens forth to his damning work 
under the congenial cover of the darkness of night. 
(John.) 

Such is the full and graphic representation afforded 
by a collation of the various incidents and expressions 
of the different writers. Yet, for us now, a still greater 
interest may be derived from these narratives, by cross- 
examination and the reconciliation of apparent disagree- 
ments. 

We commonly imagine, from the reading of these ac- 
counts, that Jesus had plainly designated Judas as the 
betrayer, to the whole company, before Judas withdrew. 
Jesus had told John that the traitor was he to whom he 
should give the morsel when he had dipped it, and 
dipping it he gave it to Judas. So, also, Jesus had re- 
sponded to the question of Judas, "Master, is it I?" in 
the most emphatic manner, assuring him that he was 



JUDAS AT THE PASSOVER TABLE. 169 

the betrayer. Must not the whole company hereby 
have been informed of the guilty one? 

Yet, from what the Evangelist John tells us, it ap- 
pears that when Judas withdrew from the company, he 
was still unsuspected by his fellow-disciples. Jesus 
gave him the ominous command, " That thou doest, do 
quickly," yet it is said that "no man at the table knew 
for what intent he spake this unto him." The disciples 
did not imagine that it referred to any wicked conduct. 
Rather, they still regarded Judas as their honored purse- 
bearer, and supposed that the Master looked to him as 
such, for the performance of useful duties connected with 
that position. "For some of them thought, because 
Judas had the bag, that Jesus had said unto him, Buy 
those things that we have need of against the feast; or 
that he should give something to the poor." It was not 
possible, in the nature of the case, that they should thus 
have regarded Judas, had they just before seen him 
pointed out by the Lord as the betrayer, and had they 
known that the terrible woe of the Master was denounced 
against him. Probably they came speedily to understand 
that he was the betrayer, when Jesus, relieved of his 
presence, began at once to pour forth his soul, now no 
longer troubled but calmed and elevated, in such words 
as these, "Now is the Son of man glorified, and God is 
glorified in him."* 

How, then, shall we construe the explicit announce- 
ments made by the Saviour, first to John, next to Judas ? 
Undoubtedly John understood from the Saviour that 
Judas was the betrayer. But, as already intimated, the 
announcement to John was probably made in a low 

* John xiii. 31. 
15 H 



170 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

voice, which none others heard, this being easily done 
because of John's position, next to Jesus. And John 
may not have communicated his information to any one 
— even to Peter, the very manner of Jesus in imparting 
it perhaps operating to restrain him. And so, when 
John says, "No man at the table knew," he means no 
one of the disciples except himself. 

But what shall we say of Christ's response to Judas ? 
Judas asked, "Master, is it I?" and Jesus answered, 
"Thou hast said." Must not the whole company have 
thus been unmistakably assured that Judas was the 
traitor, and have recoiled from him in horror ? Yet, as 
we have seen, even after this they did not suspect him, 
but regarded him with favor, and supposed him to be 
still in the confidence of his Master. How shall we 
solve this difficulty ? The solution is not easy, save upon 
one hypothesis, and upon that it is extremely easy. We 
may at first be startled by it ; we shall certainly find it 
suggestive. As Jesus could speak to John, without the 
rest of the Twelve hearing what was said, for the reason 
that John was next him, reclining on his bosom ; so 
Jesus could speak to Judas, in the emphatic words, 
" thou hast said," without the rest of the Twelve hearing 
the language, if only we may suppose that Judos was 
next the Saviour on the other side, or that Jesus was reclin- 
ing on the bosom of Judas ! 

While there is nothing in the narrative inconsistent 
with this supposition, there are some things which inci- 
dentally confirm it. For example, Jesus could not well 
have given to Judas the morsel which he had dipped, 
unless Judas had been near him. Besides, it would prob- 
ably have excited suspicion to send the morsel to one at 



JUDAS AT THE PASSOVER TABLE. 171 

a distance, while to offer it to the one next at hand was 
to follow a customary token of friendship. 

And, although it may seem a fanciful refinement, we 
confess that we have not been able to avoid the impres- 
sion, that probably the strife for places of honor at the 
beginning of this supper had been led by Judas, he not 
being able to reconcile himself to the preference which 
Christ exhibited for the disciple whom he loved, without 
claiming for himself the position of next or equal honor 
on the other side of the Master. 

Admitting the supposition, do we not find it amazingly 
suggestive ? Jesus on the bosom of Judas, at the moment 
his black-hearted treachery was ripening for execution ! 
And how doubly impressive becomes the Scripture spoken 
beforehand as prophecy, and here cited by the Saviour 
and applied to the betrayer, when we think of Judas as 
thus the familiar friend of Jesus, and thus receiving from 
his hand the bread of friendship, " He that eateth bread 
with me, hath lifted up his heel against me !" 



XXIX. 

The Agony in the Garden; as illtistrated by the Temptation in the 
Wilderness. 

Matt. xxvi. 36-46; iv. 1-11, and parallels. 

Speculation may well hesitate, lest with unhallowed 
footstep it venture within the sacred enclosure of Geth- 
semane. Still it is permitted us, with subdued and rev- 
erent spirit, even to enter the garden's innermost retreat, 
and to ponder the spectacle of the solitary midnight 
wrestlings of the Son of God, amidst the deep olive-shad- 
ows, when, for the time, a more than mortal anguish had 
fallen upon him.* 

The Master and the disciples having reached the gar- 
den, he withdraws from the company, going to the place of 
prayer. He is not wholly unattended. The " three chosen 
of the Twelve " are again with him. And now the wonder- 
ful serenity of spirit which he had before preserved forsakes 
him. Matthew writes that " he began to be sorrowful 
and very heavy." Mark's language is yet more strik- 
ing; "He began to be sore amazed, and to be very 

* Nothing in the pages of M. Renan is more shocking than his specula- 
tions on this most sacred scene. Elsewhere, in frequent instances, he suc- 
ceeds in shrouding the dead body of his Unbelief in the draperies of an 
attractive Sentimentalism. Here his art was defied. He has doubtless 
done his best, but the veil is thin and ragged, and the corpse stares at us 
in ghastly hideousness. 
172 



THE AGONY IN THE GARDEN. 173 

heavy."* Not only did he experience a distressful sink- 
ing of soul, but a sudden terror seized him. The an- 
guish was well nigh insupportable ; life itself was ready 
to give way. He exclaims, " My soul is exceeding sor- 
rowful, even unto death." Relief must be had, aurl he 
flies to God in prayer. He bids his disciple-companions 
wait and watch with him. Then going "a little fur- 
ther," (Matthew,) or " forward a little," (Mark,) until 
" he was withdrawn from them about a stone's cast," he 
" kneeled down and prayed." (Luke.) His very posture 
soon became indicative of the intensity of his feelings ; 
for he prostrated himself on the ground, (Mark,) on his 
face, (Matthew,) and so — in the language of the writer 
to the Hebrews — " oiFered up his prayers and supplica- 
tions with strong crying and tears unto him that was 
able to save him from death." 

Mark first records the substance of his prayer. He 
"prayed that, if it were possible, the hour might pass 
from him." Then he indicates more exactly, as do the 
others, the language of Jesus. Matthew gives the words 
of address, " O my Father," while Mark inserts the ad- 
ditional word of tenderness and trust, " Abba Father." 
He prays that "the cup," that is, doubtless, the dreadful 
sufferings appointed to him for the coming day, may be 
removed from his lips.f He offers this prayer in reve- 

* Alexander in loco thus writes, "Sore amazed, a very strong Greek 
word denoting both surprise and consternation, and here used in its strong- 
est sense to signify the preternatural depression and alarm, of which our 
Saviour condescended to partake, as the representative and surety of his 
people. The other verb, although of doubtful derivation, is employed by 
Xenopkon and Plato to denote extreme anxiety and anguish." 

| John xviii. 11. 
15 * 



174 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

rent submission to his Father's will: "if it be possible" 
— not otherwise. 

The agony must have been protracted; for the dis- 
ciples during its continuance were overcome with sleep. 
It was now, apparently, that, as Luke informs us, "an 
angel appeared unto him from heaven, strengthening 
him." And probably it was also in this first season of 
protracted supplication, that, according to Luke, his 
agony rose to such height and fierceness, that, even in 
the cold midnight air, his body, in sympathy with his 
rent and crushed spirit, yielded from its thousand pores 
great drops of clammy sweat, as of blood, rolling to the 
ground. 

Coining to the three disciples, whom he finds asleep 
through sorrow, he gently chides them, administers 
needed warning and caution, then goes and prays the 
second time. Mark says, he "spake the same words." 
Probably this statement was not meant to be literally 
taken. The substance of the prayer was doubtless the 
same, yet from what Matthew records as the tenor of it, 
it would appear that now the desire of relief from his an- 
ticipated sufferings was less prominent than before. The 
will of his Father that he should suffer seems to have 
been uppermost in his thoughts, with the accompanying 
feeling of resignation. The language now is, "O my 
Father, if this cup may not pass away from me except I 
drink it, thy will be done." 

This second season of prayer could not have been 
brief; for again the disciples, even incited to wakefulness 
as they had been by the remonstrance of the Master, 
were found asleep. We may infer the painfully absorb- 
ing character of the scenes through which these disciples 



THE AGONY IN THE GARDEN. 175 

for hours had been passing, when we see that now, with 
so many and such pressing inducements to vigilance, they 
should, to their own utter confusion, thus repeatedly be 
overcome with sleep. 

But the conflict was not yet over. We infer a third 
season of prayer from Mark, who speaks of his coining 
the third time to his disciples, while Matthew distinctly 
informs us that "he went away again and prayed the 
third time, saying the same words." Perhaps the fea- 
ture of acquiescence in the Divine will was, in this last 
exercise, yet more prominent and became all absorbing. 
"He was heard, in that he feared," yielding himself with 
holy and unhesitating submission to the Divine disposal. 
He received the answer to his prayer, in Divine assur- 
ances and comfort and strength, enabling him with re- 
newed serenity of spirit to move forward through all the 
dreadful way of a sacrificial death appointed him. 

We come now to the special subject of this chapter. 
It is a question of much interest, — What was the excit- 
ing cause of these dire agonies of Jesus? Not often, 
probably, is the experience of our Saviour in Gethsemane 
regarded as specifically a temptation of the devil. Yet 
there are strong reasons for so regarding it. The Wicked 
One, it is true, is not personally introduced into the 
narrative. Perhaps that was for the reason that the in- 
timations of his presence given, were deemed sufficient, 
without an express mention of the fact. 

When the temptation in the wilderness had ended, 
the devil departed from Jesus, as we read, "for a sea- 
son." Here is an intimation that he would return 
again, in like manner and for like purpose with his 
present appearing. But when did he thus personally 



176 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

return to the Saviour? We are not informed of his 
doing so at any time. Yet we find our Saviour saying 
to his disciples, on the very evening of the agony in the 
garden, perhaps only an hour before the conflict began, 
when they were about leaving the Passover table to re- 
tire from the city, "The Prince of this world cometh 
and hath nothing in me."* Here is a distinct intima- 
tion that the devil was even now at hand, and for the 
purpose of a sifting temptation ; and the designation of 
him as "the Prince of this world," looking back to him 
as he had last appeared in the temptation in the wilder- 
ness, when he tendered the Saviour "all the kingdoms 
of this world and the glory of them," seems to anticipate 
from him such another fierce onset as he had then made 
in person, and a temptation substantially of the same 
character with that which he then urged. 

With the idea of a temptation of the devil best com- 
ports the sudden seizure of the mind of Jesus with the 
dread of those sufferings which he had long anticipated 
with composure, and which this night he had regarded 
from a point of such elevation that they seemed already 
passed.f Also we can thus all the more readily think 
of this whole scene, according to the account of it as "an 
agony." The antagonism of the Human with the Di- 
vine will of the Saviour, in a conflict such as is here de- 
scribed, is by no means of such easy conception, as the 
antagonism of Christ with the devil. 

Regarding, on such grounds, the agony in the garden 
as a conflict of our Saviour with the Arch-adversary, we 
are not surprised to find many coincidences between this 
scene and that in the wilderness, which otherwise might 

* John xiv. 30. f John xvii. 4, 5. 



THE AGONY IN THE GARDEN. 177 

be deemed well nigh unaccountable. In both cases, our 
Saviour was in retirement; and there, no doubt, as here, 
for the purpose of prayer. There, the Tempter made 
three attacks; here Jesus prayed three times, as though 
his distress was as often renewed. There as here, angels 
appear, giving personal ministrations to the Saviour, 
which they do at no other time. On both occasions, the 
time is critical in the ministry of Christ. Then, he was 
about opening his public ministry; now, he was about 
closing and crowning it. 

Not only so, but regarding the occurrences in the gar- 
den as a scene of temptation corresponding to that in the 
wilderness, there is opened to us a wider analogy. We 
have already seen that as the Baptism of Christ stood at 
the entrance of his ministry considered as a whole, so his 
Transfiguration stood at the entrance of what may be 
called his passive ministry.* Regarding the agony in 
the garden as a conflict with the Devil, it is seen to oc- 
cupy the same relation to Christ's ministry of special 
suffering, which the temptation in the wilderness occu- 
pied to Christ's ministry as a whole. It was the Sav- 
iour's next most striking experience after that of the 
Transfiguration, and was directly introductory to his 
ministry of special suffering ; just as the temptation in 
the wilderness was his next most striking experience 
after that of the Baptism, and was directly introductory 
to his whole public ministry. 

In the one case as in the other, the Saviour was 
tempted to forego his career of humiliation. In the 
wilderness, the temptation addressed chiefly the side of 
our nature representing Desire; in the garden, the 

* See Ch. II. 
H * 



178 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

temptation addressed chiefly the side of our nature rep- 
resenting Fear. Thus, in these two grand instances of 
personal antagonism with the Devil, our Saviour is seen 
to have been " tempted in all points like as we are, yet 
without sin." 



XXX. 

The two cries of the People, " Hosanna to the Son of David," and 
"Away with Him— Crucify Him." 

Matt. xxi. 9 ; Luke xxiii. 21, and their parallels. 

The most impressive instance of popular caprice found 
in all history, is commonly imagined to be that afforded 
by the two cries above recorded. One day, it is said, 
the multitudes were rending the skies with their Hosan- 
nas to Jesus ; a few days after, they were clamoring for 
his blood. Popular favor is indeed most fickle, and it 
is not certain that those who so eagerly applauded the 
Saviour when his cause was in the ascendant, acted the 
part of faithful friends when suddenly he was found in 
the hands of his enemies, and his cause seemed about to 
be overthrown. 

Yet that those who on the former occasion acted the 
part of professed friends, speedily turned against Jesus, 
and, a few days after, with one consent, being " instant 
with loud voices," denied him before Pilate, demanded 
the release of Barabbas, and " required that he might be 
crucified," there is no good reason for believing. Indeed 
the evidences to the contrary are many and convincing. 
The careful study of the records here, and of other 
Scriptures bearing upon these, will show that the crowd 
which clamored for the crucifixion of Jesus was substan- 

179 



180 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

tially a different company from that which gave him 
triumphal entrance into Jerusalem. 

Let us remember, first of all, that when Jesus made 
his entry into Jerusalem, the passover was at hand, and 
that vast multitudes were gathering to the city for the 
festival. Let us further remember that the ministry of 
Jesus had been performed mainly away from Jerusalem 
and its vicinity, and principally in and around Galilee. 
Let us still further remember that Jesus was popular in 
the regions where he had chiefly labored, having been 
followed by immense crowds, who were astonished at 
his doctrine, and who witnessed or even participated in 
his many and beneficent miracles. The chief drawback 
to his popularity in these regions arose from the inter- 
ference of Scribes and Pharisees, many of whom were 
sent down from Jerusalem for the very purpose of re- 
sisting him. And let us also remember that, as the last 
circumstance mentioned intimates, Jerusalem was the 
headquarters of that Pharisaism which opposed the Sav- 
iour with bitter determination, and that the common 
people of Jerusalem, as greatly under the influence of the 
ecclesiastical leaders of the nation residing among them, 
were likewise as a body unfriendly to Jesus.* Thus in 
Jerusalem, during the great festivals, would be found 
two large sections of people, having essentially opposite 
relations to Jesus ; first, the permanent inhabitants of the 
city — his enemies ; secondly, those who had come up to 



* It was not easy for the authorities at Jerusalem, always to keep the 
people of the city united in opposition to Jesus. An instructive instance 
of the favorable impression made upon the Jerusalem people by our Sav- 
iour, and of the consequent alarm and indignation of the Rulers, may be 
found in John vii. 25-52. 



"hosanna;" "crucify him." 181 

Jerusalem from Galilee and the countries adjacent — his 
friends. 

Let us now turn to the history, and learn first, who 
they were that cried their Hosannas to the Saviour.. It 
appears that the multitude attending on him when he 
entered the city, was composed in part of those who had 
journeyed with him just previously, and in part of those 
who before had reached the city. Most of those who 
journeyed with the Saviour belonged evidently to those 
districts of country in which he had chiefly labored. 
They had come from Galilee through Perea, joining 
themselves to him in great numbers, as his admiring 
followers.* Some of them, indeed, murmured at his con- 
sorting with Zaccheus.f Many of them, no doubt, were 
mistaken friends. Yet the company, as such, believed 
in him as a great prophet, or as the Messiah, and now 
that "he was nigh to Jerusalem," thought that "the 
kingdom of God should immediately appear."J Those, 
too, who went out from the city to meet him, were strangers 
in Jerusalem. The Evangelist John thus writes, " On 
the next day much people that were come to the feast, when 
they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, took 
branches of palm-trees, and went forth to meet him, and 
cried Hosanna." 

Thus the multitude which so enthusiastically escorted 
the Saviour into Jerusalem, one part going before him 
and the other part following him,§ was made up, in both 
its parts, of those visiting the city. And these were to 
such an extent his acquaintances and friends, as to make 
it improbable that their rejoicing at his entrance into the 

* Matt. xx. 29-34, and parallels. f Luke six. 7. 

J Luke xix. 11. § Mark xi. 9. 

16 



182 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

city was a sudden effervescence of feeling, produced by 
an unreasoning impulse which had quickly become con- 
tagious, and which once over left them to be swayed by 
any new and chance impulse, however diverse from the 
former. 

We may next appeal to the history to learn who they 
were that madly vociferated the cry, "Away with him, 
Crucify him." An examination of this point will satis- 
factorily show that they were not the strangers at the 
feast, but were the people of Jerusalem, as distinguished 
from these. They were those whom the hostile Pharisees 
habitually controlled. 

Commencing with the scene before Pilate, where this 
murderous cry was raised, and going back in the narrative 
to learn how the body of people there mentioned was 
formed, we ascertain that its nucleus was the company 
which the night before had gone forth with Judas to ap- 
prehend the Saviour. These are called in the history 
"a great multitude." They went in company with a 
military force, a " band of men and officers," being them- 
selves irregularly armed with "swords and staves." 
And it is distinctly stated, that they "came from the 
chief-priests, and the scribes, and the elders." They 
were the minions of the hostile chiefs of the nation.* 

The arrest of our Saviour must have occurred near 
midnight. He was first taken before the High Priest. 
"As soon as it was day," the Sanhedrim met, and Jesus 
being brought into its presence, judgment was soon 
given against him. Little time was lost in taking him 
before Pilate, for still "it was early." Evidently "the 
whole multitude of them,"f headed by the Council, 

* Mark xiv. 43. John xviii. 2, 3. f Luke xxiii. 1. 



" HOSANNA ;" " CRUCIFY HIM." 183 

could not have been very different in its composition 
from the multitude which went out for the arrest of 
Jesus. The numerous friends of Jesus, strangers in Je- 
rusalem, lodging wherever they could, many of them 
doubtless spending the night outside the city, probably 
had not yet, in any considerable number, even heard of 
what was going on. 

Some time, perhaps an hour or two, was spent in the 
first examination by Pilate, and in taking the Saviour to 
Herod and returning again. The crowd may have re- 
ceived an accession during this time, but it remained 
essentially the same, since Pilate recognizes it as un- 
changed. "And Pilate, when he had called together 
the chief-priests, and the rulers, and the people, said unto 
them, Ye have brought this man unto me, as one that 
perverteth the people: and behold I, having examined 
him before you, have found no fault in this man, touch- 
ing those things whereof ye accuse him; no, nor yet 
Herod ; for I sent you unto him ; and lo, nothing worthy 
of death is done unto him : I will therefore chastise him 
and release him."* 

And now it is that Pilate gives the people the choice 
between Jesus and Barabbas. And they, persuaded by 
the priests, demand Barabbas, and, in a general and per- 
sistent outcry, in which the priests largely share, pro- 
nounce their verdict upon Jesus in the words, "Crucify 
him, Crucify him." 

Assuredly the history thus makes it very plain that 
those who clamored for the blood of Jesus, and were not 
afraid to utter the dreadful imprecation, " His blood be 
Ldren," were nc 

* Luke xxiii. 13-16. 



184 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

Galileans and others who had come to the feast, and who 
a few days before had given him joyful entrance into the 
city, but rather, were the rabble of Jerusalem, long since 
inflamed by their leaders with hatred to Jesus, and 
ready, in desperate hardness of heart, under the example 
and influence of those leaders, to run all lengths of 
wickedness. 

Were there any further evidence needed for corrobo- 
rating our conclusion, we might find it in the addresses 
of Peter, made in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost 
and soon after. "Peter, standing up with the eleven, 
lifted up his voice and said, Ye men of Judea, and all ye 
that dwell at Jerusalem. . . . Him being delivered 
by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, 
ye have taken and by wicked hands have crucified and 
slain." " Whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the 
presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him 
go . . . and desired a murderer to be granted unto 
you." "And now, brethren, I wot that through igno- 
rance ye did it, as did also your rulers."* 

Perhaps it may have seemed unnecessary to undertake 
in so serious a way the correction of a popular misappre- 
hension; yet if the undertaking has led us to a more just 
view of the statements of the Sacred Records, it may be 
esteemed as well worthy our pains. 

* Acts ii and iii. See also Acts xiii. 27. 



XXXI. 

Jicdas Repenting at the sight of Jesus Condemned. 

Matt, xxvii. 3-5. 

Were the gospel history a fiction, as some have been 
reckless enough to assert, it would need to be regarded 
as a miracle of art. Such a character as that of Judas, 
introduced as he is, acting the part he does, and depart- 
ing from the scene in the manner described, exceeds, as 
we think, in its terrible truth, its truth to nature de- 
praved and acted on by higher powers of wickedness, 
anything known in the creations of art. 

Such a character, too, is wholly, unique in the history. 
In the whole Bible are found very few instances of sui- 
cide, and the gospel records are a total stranger to this 
crime, except in the single case of Judas. Yet the de- 
lineation is perfect. 

The fact that Judas repented of his treachery, the oc- 
casion of his so doing, and the remorse with which he 
was filled, driving him to despair and self-destruction, 
afford a study of fearful interest. 

Judas had been successful in his effort to deliver up 
his Master. At midnight he had led an armed band to 
the side of Olivet, where he knew that Jesus might be 
found, and coming upon the company of his old associ- 
ates, had advanced to his Master, and according to pre- 
concert betrayed him with a kiss. 



186 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

The deed was consummated, and for a little Judas is 
lost sight of. Jesus is carried before Annas and before 
Caiaphas, and after some hours is brought to trial by the 
Council. We read of the other disciples, how they for- 
sook Jesus and fled, how John and Peter rallied and 
followed their Master into the High-Priest's house, how 
there Peter's small courage again wholly forsook him and 
thrice he shamefully denied his Lord ; but during this 
time we read nothing of Judas. Where he was, or what 
he was doing, we can only imagine. Yet we know that 
in the hours which elapsed from near midnight till the 
early morning, a great change came over him. 

It was "yet early," when Jesus was led from the 
Council to Pilate's hall of judgment, and this seems to 
have been the time when Judas, as the record states, 
"repented himself" of what he had done. It was "when 
he saw that Jesus ivas condemned." This language, too, 
makes it easy for us to, imagine that Judas was a witness 
of his Master's trial before the Council. He heard the 
dreadful words of the unanimous verdict, " He is guilty 
of death," and witnessed the mockeries and insults heaped 
upon the condemned but unoffending One. He beheld 
the Master in the power of his enemies. He saw unmis- 
takably the consequences of his treachery. And that 
sight, flashing through all the specious reasonings with 
which he had deluded himself, brought home to him, all 
hardened before, the full sense of his damning guilt. He 
saw Jesus condemned to death, and in an instant the 
horrid crime of his Lord's foul murder was charged upon 
his astonished soul. 

And as Peter had gone out to weep bitterly for his 
denials of Jesus, so we may think Judas went out from 



DOOM OF JUDAS. 187 

the Council and the presence of his Master, not indeed 
under the movings of contrition, but under the bitings 
of remorse and the tauntings of the Devil who was not 
done with his victim. And can we not imagine him, 
pallid and frightened, roaming wildly the streets of Je- 
rusalem, saying to himself, " What have I done ? What 
have I done?" And as he goes, surely the money in 
his purse finds a tongue, and instead of soothing him 
with the sound of its silvery sweetness, cries with accents 
piercing his heart like barbed and poisoned arrows, " It 
is the price of blood — the price of blood." 

Imagination aside, we know what was his frantic 
thought, under the lacerations of conscience. He will 
revoke his bargain with the priests, and undo his act of 
treachery. He will return the money and get back the 
Master. And we see him hastening to the temple, where 
he may find a portion of his employers, and coming into 
their presence, and holding forth the money, and ex- 
claiming piteously and imploringly, " I have sinned in 
that I have betrayed the innocent blood." 

Ah ! what stinging power did this reflection give to 
the guilt of Judas — " the innocent blood !" Could he 
in that dreadful hour have only recalled some wrong 
done him by the Master, upon which to found a just 
resentment, or could he have thought of any conduct of 
the Master tending to discredit his claim to be the Mes- 
siah and the Son of God ; thus giving some color of right 
to his own act in delivering him to the priests, or to the 
act of the priests in condemning him ; it would not have 
been so difficult to bear the smitings of conscience. But 
to have perpetrated this deed utterly unprovoked, and 
wholly in behalf of the wrong and the wicked, it was 



188 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

more than he could bear. And unwittingly he is made 
a chief witness for Jesus, in a voluntary and unimpeach- 
able testimony to his spotless innocence. 

" He did not deserve this at my hands, or anything 
like it," is the confession of Judas. " He was innocent, 
and I ought to have defended him. He was innocent, 
and I betrayed him. Here, take the money, and spare 
me the guilt of his death. 'I have sinned' — 'I have 
sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood.' " 

But Judas miscalculated, if he expected sympathy 
from the priests. They had no concern, but for the ben- 
efit which inured to them from his crime. Disdainful 
of him in his pitiful grief, and unmoved at his testimony 
to the innocence of Jesus ; satisfied that they had ob- 
tained secure possession of the object of their hate, and 
might now dispose of him as they would — let him be 
innocent or not — these callous wretches in cold contempt 
thrust Judas from their presence, with the words inspired 
from the pit, " What is that to us ? — See thou to that." 

Thus they parleyed at the door of the temple. And 
in his distraction, Judas seems to have pressed upon the 
priests, until they retreated within the Sanctuary, if he 
did not enter it himself.* "When at last they drove him 

* There arc two words in the Greek Testament, as scholars well know, 
which are rendered temple in our version. The one of these uniformly sig- 
nifies, not only the building proper, made up of the Holy Place and the 
Most Holy, into which only the priests were permitted to enter, but the 
building together with its various courts of popular assembly. It is this 
word which is used, whenever our Saviour is spoken of as teaching in the 
temple, or driving the money-changers out of the temple. The other word 
uniformly signifies the sanctuary proper, the building into which none 
might enter save the priests. 

Now it is the latter word, which is used in the Greek, where it is said 
that Judas "cast down the pieces of silver in the temple." And, as Arch- 



DOOM OF JUDAS. 189 

off, with words of cutting and fiendish scorn, he turned 
upon them only to fling after them into the Holy Place 
the money which they had refused. " And he cast down 
the pieces of silver in the temple and departed." 

The next thing in the record is, "and went and hanged 
himself." And was not everything in the probable cir- 
cumstances just such as to sharpen his remorse and bring 
him to this end? 

We may think of him as he leaves the temple, return- 
ing to the streets and roaming them more wildly than 
ever. The money is out of his hands, but the blood is 
still there. And perhaps, as he goes his impetuous and 
unguided way, he sometimes comes upon the crowd in 
front of Pilate's palace, and hears the cry, "Away with 
him — Crucify him 5" or it may be he crosses the proces- 
sion which conducts Jesus from Pilate to Herod, or from 
Herod back again to Pilate, and catches a. sight of the 
lowly and innocent one, beset by the rabble and arrayed 
in the garments of mockery. 

And thus his thoughts are soon maddening him to 
despair. The very elements and influences doubtless 
seem to conspire against him. The morning sun shines 
but to wither and blight him with its yellow light. The 
air grows thick and oppressive as with a curse. Sepa- 
rated by his own choice from his disciple-companions, 
who would now shudder at the sight of him ; cast off and 
scorned by those who once communed and covenanted 
with him for their own wicked ends; having sinned too 

bishop Trench observes, in bis "Synonyms of the New Testament," this 
sets forth most vividly the despair and defiance of Judas, that he presses 
into the very Sanctuary and there casts down before the priests the ac- 
cursed price of blood. 



190 HOUBS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

deeply against God and his Son to be willing to ask for 
pardon; and the time now hastening apace when that 
innocent blood which he has betrayed shall be foully 
shed ; he yields himself to the impelling devil who has 
possessed him and resolves upon self-destruction. 

He will close his eyes to the sickening sunlight, and 
escape the intolerable oppression of life, and go forever 
from that world which has excluded him from its pity 
and hope, and branded him as the object of all loathing 
and hate. — And over the steep, rocky hill-side, beneath 
Jerusalem's wall, he swings himself, thence again to 
fall headlong, perishing miserably. 



XXXII. 

Joseph of Arimathea, and his Mission. 

Matt, xxvii. 57-60, and parallels. 

Jesus, on the way to death, suffered every conceivable 
indignity. Yet having expired on the cross, his body 
was not only preserved from destruction, or from any 
serious marring of its organism, but was made the ob- 
ject of honorable and tender ministrations. The provi- 
dence of God herein was most notable. 

Had the Romans been permitted their way with the 
body of Jesus, it would have remained on the cross 
until it went to decay, or was devoured by ravenous 
birds. Had the Jews been permitted their way, it would 
have received the infamous interment commonly given 
to detestable criminals. God's special providence inter- 
fered to prevent both these results, and to secure a very 
different and an exactly befitting disposition of the body. 
And what was this special providence? 

We might have supposed that the Apostles, or other 
Galilean friends of Jesus, would have been anxious to 
secure his body for burial. Some of them we know 
witnessed his crucifixion. Yet these might well have de- 
spaired of being permitted to execute any desire of their 
own. The body belonged to Pilate; and what prospect 
was there that the Governor would yield to the wishes 
of such persons as they — obscure ones and strangers — 



192 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

especially when the Jews might be expected to resist 
them? 

But precisely at the juncture demanding interference, 
there appears on the scene a person never before heard 
of in the history, who effectually performs the needed 
work, and who again immediately and wholly disap- 
pears. Seemingly he was raised up and commissioned 
for this special service. He is a man of position and 
influence, is desirous of giving the body of Jesus honor- 
able burial, and promptly undertakes the office. All 
four of the Evangelists were moved to record the doings 
of this person, and it may be of use for us to review and 
compare their narratives, and thence endeavor to ascer- 
tain the causes which operated with such force as to set 
him upon his extraordinary performance. 

All the writers designate him as " Joseph of Arima- 
thea." Probably his birth-place was in the mountains 
of Ephraim, although he had now become a resident of 
Jerusalem. From Matthew we learn that he was "rich." 
It is Matthew, also, who by and by informs us, that the 
tomb in which Joseph buried our Lord, was " his own 
new tomb," thus indicating, though without declaring 
it, the fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy, " He made his 
grave with the rich in his death." Luke characterizes 
him as " a good man and a just," belonging thus to the 
better class of Jews, and, as in the case of Simeon and 
Anna, indulging some correct expectations of the Mes- 
siah ; " who also himself waited for the kingdom of 
God." (Mark and Luke.) He was also "a counsellor," 
(Luke,) " an honorable counsellor," (Mark,) from which 
we should naturally infer that he was a member of the 
supreme judicial tribunal of the nation. This inference 



JOSEPH OF ARIMATHEA. 193 

is made certain by the declaration of Luke, that "the 
same had not consented to the counsel and deed of them." 
He, and probably Nicodemus, and possibly some others, 
were absent from that packed meeting of the Sanhedrim 
which gave a unanimous verdict against Jesus.* Still 
further, he was "Jesus' disciple," (Matthew,) "but se- 
cretly, for fear of the Jews," (John,) — he yielding 
unworthily to the special temptation of his high position. 

Thus full is the account of this man, gathered from 
all the writers. lie seems to have been much such a 
person and disciple as 2sicodemus, his brother Senator, 
and naturally, though significantly enough, these two 
are presently found in co-operation, probably having 
previously conferred respecting their proposed work. 

Joseph is already on his way to the Roman Governor, 
prosecuting his mission, when introduced into the nar- 
rative. The time, according to Matthew and Mark, was 
the evening — " when the even was come." This desig- 
nation of time was very indefinite then, as it is now. 
The evening sacrifice occurred at the ninth hour, or at 
three o'clock, P. M. Luke has it, that "the Sabbath 
drew on." It was, by our reckoning, somewhere between 
three and six o'clock, P. M. Both Mark and Luke men- 
tion, as John has also done, that it was " the prepara- 
tion j" and Mark explains this to mean, " the day before 
the Sabbath." The point needing to be observed is this, 
that the time remaining for the burial was short. The 
arrival of the Sabbath must be anticipated, and for this, 
prompt and even hurried measures were required. 

The Pharisees, like Joseph and Nicodemus, were anx- 
ious that the burial should take place before the Sabbath 

* Mark xiv. 6'4. 
17 I 



194 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

commenced, (John,) and probably the visits of the two 
parties to Pilate occurred near the same time. Joseph, 
having obtained his request, returned to the cross, mak- 
ing purchase of fine linen and carrying it with him. 
Meanwhile, and as if by previous agreement with Jo- 
seph, Mcodemus had procured the desired spices ; and 
soon the body is lifted from the cross, wound in the linen 
with the spices, conveyed to the new sepulchre in the 
garden hard by, and there secured. 

This narrative shows Joseph of Arimathea acting a 
most honorable part. But more than this, it shows him 
acting a most courageous part. And that, when we are 
informed that previously he had been only a secret disci- 
ple, through fear. The Evangelist Mark uses this sig- 
nificant language concerning Joseph — that he " went in 
boldly unto Pilate and craved the body of Jesus." And 
assuredly his act must have required courage. Jesus 
himself to all appearances overcome by his enemies and 
his cause hopelessly lost, it was an act of highest heroism 
thus almost alone to stand forth for the honor of Jesus 
and for the upholding of his cause. 

Well may we ask, How came it to pass that he who 
was only a secret disciple through fear, when Jesus was 
popular and his cause was seemingly marching to tri- 
umph, was now so courageous? The answer to this 
question, that " the heroism of faith is usually kindled 
by desperate circumstances,"* does not, even if correct in 
itself, in the least explain the fact. At best it only places 
it in a class of similar facts, all of which may require 
explanation. The Apostles of our Lord exhibited little 

* Prof. Brown. 



JOSEPH OF ARIMATHEA. 195 

"heroism of faith" amidst these "desperate circum- 
stances." 

A comparison of the records puts us, as we think, 
upon a rational explanation of Joseph's extraordinary 
conduct. And it is mainly for the sake of this explana- 
tion that such comparison has here been made. 

It is strongly intimated, by all the circumstances of 
the case as the records present them, that the reason for 
Joseph's conduct was just this, that he now found him- 
self, in the peculiar providences of God, to be the only 
person having any concern for the honor of Christ, who 
was so situated as to be able to procure for him an hon- 
orable burial. 

The Sabbath drew on ; the enemies of Jesus were hur- , 
rying to bury him with the malefactors ; most of the dis- 
ciples were scattered abroad, like sheep without a shep- 
herd; those who remained were destitute of influence 
with Pilate for procuring the body of Jesus, and, even 
if they should overcome all obstacles and procure the 
body, might not be able to find a suitable tomb. Jo- 
seph, we may presume, was acquainted with these facts. 
And he knew further that he had influence with Pilate — ■ 
that he might be able to secure the body ; and, still fur- 
ther, there was his own new tomb, hard by the cross, with- 
out an occupant, standing ready to receive the body of 
Jesus. 

Did not all the indications of that solemn and eventful 
hour point to Joseph, as the man upon whom was devolved 
the work of rescuing the body from the infamy fast pre- 
paring for it, and giving it honorable sepulture? Must 
he not have felt that the crisis had arrived, when he 
must banish his fears and boldly avow his attachment 



196 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

to Jesus, or utterly and forever renounce all pretence of 
friendship? It was, as we cannot but think, under the 
pressure of these circumstances, so admirably adapted to 
test the reality of his discipleship, and "kindle his 
faith" for heroic achievement, that he went in boldly 
unto Pilate, and consummated the burial of his Master. 
Supposing this explanation to be correct, the conduct 
of Nicodemus is just what we might have expected. 
Of like character with Joseph, and feeling to some ex- 
tent the force of the same providential circumstances, he 
co-operates with Joseph. Yet it is not Nicodemus who 
owns the convenient tomb, and the circumstances do not 
so fully devolve on him the responsibilities of the occa- 
sion. Hence, it is exactly natural that while his courage 
is developed to a new degree and he is led to act a 
worthy part, he should still be seen only as the helper of 
Joseph, who remains the hero of the occasion. 



XXXIII. 

Jesus, after his Resurrection, appearing first to Mary Magdalene. 

Mark xvi. 9; John xx. 11-18; Matt, xxviii. 8-10. 

In no part of the Gospel History is it so difficult to 
reduce the accounts of the Evangelists to harmony, as 
in the narratives of the events immediately following 
the Resurrection. 

Some persons — unbelievers — declare the accounts 
hopelessly contradictory, and charge the writers with 
fraud and falsehood. Others, who have implicit faith 
in the records, and who believe that seeming incon- 
sistencies would be wholly relieved, had we a full 
knowledge of the actual occurrences, doubt whether it is 
possible with our present knowledge to relieve them, 
and therefore discourage all attempts in this direction. 
Others still, and among them probably the majority of 
wise expositors, not professing to find a complete narra- 
tive in any blended account of the four writers, hold that 
apparent contradictions may be removed by the supposi- 
tion of certain circumstances having existed and certain 
events having occurred, which, although not recorded, 
are within the limits of easy probability. This method 
of reconciling seeming discrepancies is everywhere recog- 
nized as legitimate, under similar conditions, and we 
cannot imagine why it should be rejected here. 

The fact of considerable diversity in the statements 
17* 197 



198 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

may be rationally accounted for. Each writer had his 
own point of observation of the facts occurring. Each 
had his special end in view, in selecting and recording 
those which he has given. And further, it may reason- 
ably be supposed, that any apparent confusion in the 
narrative is the natural result of a confusion which 
actually existed in the movements of the disciples. 
When we reflect for a moment on the fact that the dis- 
ciples were strangers in Jerusalem, and probably on the 
night preceding the Resurrection lodged some in one 
place and some in another — on the fact that the first 
tidings from the sepulchre came early in the morning — 
and on the fact that these tidings were of a most astound- 
ing character; is it not evident that some confusion of 
movement must have occurred? There would be a hur- 
rying to and fro. Some would be going to the sepulchre, 
while others were returning from it. The sepulchre be- 
ing visited at different times, by different parties, the 
changes taking place would give rise to different reports 
concerning what was there seen. Under these circum- 
stances, to demand that each of the writers, telling his 
own story from his own point of view and for his own 
particular purpose, should compose a narrative easily 
falling in with and fitting all the others, is simply pre- 
posterous. Such a demand would be reasonable, as some 
one has suggested, only on the supposition that the whole 
company of disciples marched to the tomb, by a pro- 
gramme previously arranged. 

It is our object, in this chapter, to show how one of 
the most troublesome apparent disagreements in the re- 
cords may be reasonably explained. 

In the gospel by John we have the account of an in- 



FIRST APPEARING OP THE RISEN SAVIOUR. 199 

terview of the risen Jesus with Mary Magdalene at the 
sepulchre. Mary is evidently alone. — In Mark's gospel, 
we have the distinct statement that Jesus appeared first 
to Mary Magdalene. We can hardly help the conclusion 
that the interview which John records is that to which 
Mark refers, and was Christ's first appearance to mortal 
vision after his Resurrection. — Yet, from Matthew's ac- 
count, we obtain the impression that Jesus first revealed 
himself to the company of women, who, according to 
the first three writers, came early in the morning to the 
sepulchre, Mary Magdalene being then with them. And 
he revealed himself to them, not at the sepulchre, but 
after they had fled from it, going in obedience to the 
command of the angels to bring word to the disciples of 
the Resurrection. Matthew writes, "And as they went 
to tell his disciples, behold Jesus met them, saying, All 
hail. And they came and* held him by the feet, and 
worshipped him."* 

Now how are we to believe, without doing violence to 
the narratives, that Mary Magdalene, alone, and at the 
sepulchre, was the first to look upon the risen Saviour? 

There seems to be no difficulty in the supposition, that 
when the company of women, including Mary Magda- 
lene, approached the sepulchre early in the morning, and 
found the door open, Mary, without waiting until the 
angels made known the fact of the Resurrection, under 
the belief that the sepulchre had been rifled of its occu- 
pant, separated herself from the company and hastened 

•;■::- \Ye follow the received text, although some of the critics reject the 
phrase, "and as they went to tell his disciples." Ellicott is disposed 
to find relief from the difficulty mentioned by adopting the view of these 
critics. Life of Christ, p. 351. This we think unnecessary. 



200 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

to bring the tidings to Peter and John. The Evangelist 
John writes concerning Mary, when she saw that the 
stone was taken from the sepulchre, " Then she runneth 
and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple 
whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken 
away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not. 
where they have laid him." John indeed writes as if 
Mary going alone to the sepulchre had made this dis- 
covery, when he says, " The first day of the week cometh 
Mary Magdalene, early, when it was dark, unto the sep- 
ulchre, and seeth the stone taken away ;" yet obviously 
he thus writes because it was Mary alone who gave the 
information to himself and Peter. He was intent, not 
on the visit of the women but on his own visit, and was 
showing how it came to be made. Mary's language, as 
John gives it, distinctly intimates that she had been at 
the sepulchre in company with others. She says, "we 
know not where they have laid him." 

Thus, then, was Mary probably separated from the 
company of the women. The two disciples ran to the 
sepulchre, yet did not arrive until after the women had 
left, and did not meet them on the way. The disciples 
made their observations and departed, Mary meanwhile 
having followed them, and having reached the sepulchre 
perhaps not far from the time they left it. And now, 
remaining there alone, opportunity would be given for 
the interview with her described so affectingly by the 
Evangelist John. 

Yet the principal question remains unanswered ; the 
question, How can this interview be consistently con- 
ceived of as occurring before that with the company of 
women mentioned by Matthew, so as to be regarded the 



FIRST APPEARING OF THE RISEN SAVIOUR. 201 

first, according to the declaration of Mark ? There is a 
way, we think, in which this may easily be done, without 
violence either to the narratives or to the manifest prob- 
abilities of the case. 

All difficulty is here created by the gratuitous sup- 
position that our Saviour appeared to the women soon 
after their flight from the sepulchre, and in its immediate 
vicinity. We say gratuitous supposition. There is not 
the slightest evidence in its favor. So far as the record 
goes, we have the language, that " as they went to tell 
his disciples, Jesus met them." It may be admitted that 
the first impression produced by this language is favora- 
ble to the supposition stated. Yet nothing is plainer 
than the fact that these records are of a condensed and 
summary sort, and were not always intended to give at 
the first glance accurate impressions of the details of time 
and place. For example, Matthew says nothing of any 
interview of our Saviour, after his Resurrection, with any 
of the Apostles in Jerusalem, and, according to the first 
impression received from the reading of Matthew's ac- 
count by itself, Jesus ascended to heaven from Galilee. 
And the narrative in Luke, read by itself, gives the im- 
pression that our Saviour ascended from near Jerusalem, 
on the evening following his Resurrection. We know from 
the Acts that he ascended from near Jerusalem, forty 
days after his Resurrection. We may not, then, here 
insist on first impressions. We must avail ourselves of 
all the information afforded, and thus secure, so far as 
may be, right impressions. 

Matthew writes, as we have seen, that " as they went 
to tell his disciples, Jesus met them." But where were 
the disciples, and how long did it take the women to find 



202 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

them ? The common supposition seems to be, that the 
company of the Apostles all lodged in Jerusalem, at one 
and the same place, and that the women knew just where 
to find them. The probabilities, however, are to the con- 
trary of this. Being strangers in Jerusalem, and the 
city now overflowing with the multitudes who had come 
to the passover, probably the Apostles were much scat- 
tered; perhaps most of them were lodging with their 
friends at Bethany, or elsewhere amidst their familiar 
haunts on the Mount of Olives.* Peter and John, we 
may think, lodged in the city. John was to some extent 
acquainted there, and seems to have had there a place 
of temporary abode, to which he took the mother of our 
Lord.f And Peter and John were together, wherever 
it was they were staying.^ The last we read, before this, 
of the rest of the eleven, they were scattered on the 
Mount of Olives, and not until the evening of the first 
day of the week do we learn of any gathering of the 
company in Jerusalem. Even then Thomas is absent, § 
and the rest are rejoicing over the appearing of the Lord 
to Simon, showing that he had been separated from the 
others. 1 1 

It seems altogether probable that the women, charged 
with the message to the disciples, were some length of 

* No doubt at the festivals strangers were compelled to seek lodgings 
through the surrounding country, out to a considerable distance. Thus 
probably Simon the Cyrenian was coming in from his night-abode in " the 
country," to the morning sacrifice, when he was taken and compelled to 
bear the cross of Jesus ; and thus Cleopas and his companion may have 
had their place of temporary residence at Emmaus, and may have been 
going to it for the night, when joined by Christ. 

f John xviii. 16; xix. 27. % John xx. 2. § John xx. 24. 

|| Luke xxiv. 34. 



FIRST APPEARING OP THE RISEN SAVIOUR. 203 

time in finding them. Perhaps they first came into the 
city, the sepulchre according to the old tradition being a 
short distance from the western wall, going first in quest 
of Peter and John whom they knew to be lodging there. 
And we may suppose, that not finding these disciples, 
who had already started for the sepulchre on the intelli- 
gence given by Mary, they passed on through the city 
eastward and out to the Mount of Olives, in search of 
the others. 

And it may have been in this latter part of their long 
walk, " as they went to tell his disciples," that, in some 
of the seclusions of Olivet, the Saviour, having already 
appeared to Mary at the sepulchre, and transferring him- 
self in his resurrection-body at will, revealed himself to 
them. 

By this method of probable conjecture, we avoid the 
difficulty suggested, and were there nothing in the rec- 
ords going directly to confirm the conjectures made, we 
need not hesitate to accept them, so long as nothing in 
the records is found to contradict them. But it so hap- 
pens, that a passage in the gospel by Luke, in a most 
incidental way falls in with these conjectures, and with 
our inferences from them, in a manner remarkably to 
confirm them. Let us see. 

The two disciples going to Emmaus, who plainly 
were familiar friends of the Apostles,* — having started 
from Jerusalem not far, we may suppose, from the mid- 
dle of the day, give to the unknown person who has 
accosted them, the following statement of the facts 
known to them on leaving the city. They say, " Yea, 
and certain women also of our company made us aston- 

* Luke xxiv. 22, 23. 



204 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

ished, which were early at the sepulchre. And when 
they found not his body, they came, saying, that they 
had also seen a vision of angels which said that he was 
alive." Evidently this was the same company of 
women, of whose interview with the angels the first 
three Evangelists tell us. Yet when they met these 
disciples in the city, they spoke only of the vision of 
angels which they had seen, and of what the angels had 
told them, saying nothing of having seen the Lord. Must 
we not suppose that the interview with him had not yet oc- 
curred ? Not at their first flight from the sepulchre, as 
we again see, did the Lord reveal himself to these women. 
Sufficient time elapsed, as is here intimated, for him to 
appear, according to Mark's statement, "first to Mary 
Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils." 



XXXIV. 

Christ's saying to Mary Magdalene, "Touch me not: for I am not 
yet Ascended to my Father." 

John xx. 17; xvi. 16; xiv. 3. 

Mary was alone at the sepulchre, Peter and John 
having recently withdrawn. Full of the thought that 
the body of her Lord had been stolen away, she stands 
there weeping. Presently, her tears still falling, she 
stoops into the sepulchre, and beholds, what Peter and 
John had not seen, two angels clothed in white. 

It is remarkable that at this sight Mary evinces no 
surprise. She is sufficiently composed to observe the 
exact position of the angels, "sitting, the one at the 
head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus 
had lain." And when they address her with the sooth- 
ing remonstrance, "Woman, why weepest thou?" she 
answers with the utmost calmness, and from the fulness 
of her heart, " Because they have taken away my Lord, 
and I know not where they have laid him." 

Behold the might of love ! She did not fear ; for in 
her heart was no room for fear. " Perfect love casteth 
out fear." At that moment, Mary would doubtless 
have little recked it, had the earth opened before her to 
swallow her up. 

Yet, having answered the question of the angels, she 
rises, as with womanly dignity, to retire. As she rises, 

18 205 



206 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

she partially turns, and in so doing catches a glimpse 
of some one standing back of her. Her eyes are filled 
with tears ; perhaps the morning has not far advanced ; 
possibly Jesus is different in appearance ; above all she 
is not expecting to see him alive. At any rate she fails 
to recognize him. 

He addresses to her the same question of remonstrance 
which the angels had asked, and still his voice is that 
of a stranger. She gives him a courageous reply, such 
as only the fulness of love would dictate. Supposing 
him, very naturally, to be the gardener, and thinking 
that probably it is he who has removed the body of her 
Lord, she cries, " Sir, if thou have borne him hence, 
tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him 
away." 

But it is Jesus. And now he discloses himself to her, 
even through all the obstacles which before had pre- 
vented her from recognizing him. And how does he 
make himself known ? He does it instantly and com- 
pletely, by the utterance of a single word. Yet that 
word is her name. " Jesus saith unto her, Mary." 

No word comes so near to us as our name; none 
searches so closely after our personality, and carries so 
fully with it our very selves. And this one word, per- 
haps pronounced by the Saviour in his old familiar tone, 
was a quick and full revelation. Not a doubt remained 
as to who he was, and the full sense of her relations to 
him as his disciple came rushing upon her soul with 
overwhelming power. Turning completely round, she 
exclaims, " Rabboni," " My Master," and probably, in 
the transport of her feelings, is ready to cling to him, 
never more to be separated. Jesus, however, checks 



Christ's saying, "touch me not." ' 207 

her movement, saying, " Touch me not ; for I am not 
yet ascended to my Father." 

The prohibition, " Touch me not," is regarded as one 
of the sayings of our Lord most difficult of interpreta- 
tion. Tholuck, after mentioning a long list of varying 
opinions concerning it, expressed by leading expositors, 
declares himself unable to adopt any one of them with 
confidence, and declines offering any independent judg- 
ment. We would venture to ask, whether the reason 
assigned for the prohibition, may not be expected to 
throw some light on the prohibition itself? — whether, 
indeed, in the ambiguities of the one, the other may not 
be looked to for a decisive settlement of the meaning ? 

Fixing our regards, then, upon the reason assigned ; — 
" for I am not yet ascended to my Father," let us revert 
to our Saviour's sayings upon this point, and see if we 
can discern in them any reason adapted to restrain the 
probable action of Mary. 

One of the most remarkable of these sayings is the 
following, "A little while, and ye shall not see me ; and 
again a little while and ye shall see me, because I go to 
the Father."* The disciples were at a loss to understand 
this saying, and inquired concerning it among them- 
selves. And Jesus explained it, much to their satisfac- 
tion, on this wise, " I came forth from the Father, and 
am come into the world ; again I leave the world, and 
go to the Father."f Before this, Jesus had declared, 

* John xvi. 16. The critics would omit from this verse the clause, " be- 
cause I go to the Father." The omission, however, makes no difference; 
for this verse looks directly back to the 10th verse, " because I go to the 
father and ye see me no more." 

f John xvi. 28. 



208 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

" I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and pre- 
pare a place for you, i" will come again and receive you 
unto myself ; that where I am, there ye may be also. ,,t ' 

Now supposing Mary to have been familiar with such 
teachings of our Lord — and the fact that he spoke to 
her as he did implies this familiarity — is it not natural 
to suppose that when she first recognized the risen Sav- 
iour, her thought was that Jesus in death had left the 
world and gone to the Father, and that having returned 
to life, he had now come from the Father ? How ex- 
actly would this suit his very words, " a little while and 
ye shall not see me, and again a little while and ye shall 
see me, because I go to the Father 9" And, of course, so 
thinking, Mary would further think, " he has now come 
to take his disciples to himself, that they may abide with 
him for ever, even according to his promise, 'I will 
come again and receive you unto myself, that where I 
am, there ye may be also.' " 

And was it not in view of such misapprehensions as 
these that Jesus said, " Touch me not ?" As if he had 
said, " You are mistaken in supposing that I have now 
come from the Father, and I must wholly disappoint 
you. ' I am not yet ascended to my Father,' and hence 
cannot now take you to myself. Earthly fellowship can 
no longer be permitted, and the time has not come for 
the heavenly. Therefore cling not to me ; but instead, 
go from me and resume the life of service ; ' go to my 
brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, 
and your Father, and to my God, and your God.' " 

* John xiv. 3. 



XXXV. 

The Incredulity of Tliomas; as Overcome in like manner tvith that 
of Nathanael. 

John xx. 24-29; i. 48, 49. 

Through the week following our Lord's Resurrection, 
the unbelieving Thomas had been saying to his fellow- 
disciples, " Except I shall see in his hands the print of 
the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not 
believe." Let us observe how this extreme incredulity 
was overcome. 

Faith in the Resurrection of Jesus was not for the 
disciples an easy matter. Their very confidence in the 
Messiahship of Jesus prevented them from regarding 
his death as possible, until he should have "restored 
again the kingdom to Israel." They did not interpret 
aright his predictions concerning his death. Perhaps 
they attached to them no definite meaning whatever. 
Their dominant and absorbing feeling led them to an- 
ticipate with confidence his triumph over all opposition, 
in the speedy establishment of his kingdom. When, 
unresisting and as if helpless, he was arrested before 
their eyes, bound and led away, and then shamefully 
put to death, they were utterly confounded. In the sud- 
den prostration of their hopes, they could not at once 
think that, like as his predictions concerning his death 
had now received a literal fulfillment, so might they an- 

18 * 209 



210 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

ticipate his literal Resurrection. All was dismay, and 
the dejection of deepest despondency. 

Thus none of them credited the first reports from the 
tomb. Mary Magdalene "went and told them that 
had been with him as they mourned and wept. And 
they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had 
been seen of her, believed not." The company of women 
reported the same things. " And their words seemed 
to them as idle tales, and they believed not." Not until 
he had actually appeared to one of their own number, to 
Peter, did they credit the joyful intelligence. 

On the evening following the Resurrection, Jesus ap- 
peared in the midst of the company of the Apostles, and 
after " upbraiding them with their unbelief and hardness 
of heart," showed them his hands and his feet, and ate 
before them, and discoursed to them. As might have 
been expected, they were hereby lifted from the depths 
of despondency to the heights of joy. " Then were the 
disciples glad when they saw the Lord." 

From this meeting of the Lord with his Apostles, 
Thomas was absent. Even more incredulous than his 
brother disciples, he probably felt an indifference to what 
was going on. He treated with even greater contempt 
the reports concerning the Resurrection, and now that 
his Master was dead, hoped for nothing further.* If, 
on the clay following the Resurrection, he had been in 
the city at all, perhaps, like the two disciples going to 
Emmaus, he had left it, amidst the eventful incidents 
rapidly occurring, and gone to his abode in the country. 

The records do not indeed directly charge Thomas 

* For an admirable discussion of the character of Thomas, and of his 
behaviour at this juncture, see Dr. Hanna's "Forty Days." 



THE DOUBTER CONVINCED. 211 

with guilty neglect, in failing to be present with his fel- 
low-disciples, yet they strongly imply it. The gathering 
of a deeper cloud upon him, in whose gloom he was left 
to walk for many days, seems like an intended chastise- 
ment for wilful error. 

Not having been present, " the other disciples therefore 
said unto him, We have seen the Lord." Probably they 
lost no time in making this joyful communication. Prob- 
ably they fully rehearsed the particulars of the Master's 
interview. Yet so deplorably dark had become the mind 
of Thomas, this explicit testimony of the whole company 
of his fellow-Apostles made no impression upon him, 
except to prompt the most unreasonable exactions in 
order to his faith. They had been permitted to look 
upon the Lord, and had been invited to handle him, that 
they might know he was no ghostly apparition ; and now 
Thomas declares that unless he has the same opportunity, 
and actually avails himself of it, to his satisfaction, he 
will not believe. Incredulous as were the other disciples, 
the testimony of Peter that he had seen the Lord was 
gladly credited. Thomas persisted in his unbelief against 
such testimony multiplied 'to tenfold strength. If they 
deserved the upbraidings of the Master, how much more 
richly Thomas. 

Yet he was a true disciple, though now under strong 
temptation. The Saviour had not forgotten him, but 
doubtless had borne him tenderly in mind, and had 
prayed for him, that his faith might not utterly fail. 
And the Saviour will presently bring him to suitable 
feelings. The method of the Lord's procedure herein is 
highly suggestive. 

He leaves the guilty disciple for a time to the unhap- 



212 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

piness which he has wrought for himself. Indeed 
Thomas is not to be restored, until he has repented of 
his fault in absenting himself from his brother Apostles 
and has returned to their company. Not until a full 
week has elapsed, and they are assembled again much 
as they were before, does Jesus appear to them and to 
Thomas. The mode of his entrance among them is again 
the same, tending to create doubt concerning the reality 
of his being in the flesh. He does not condescend to 
make the way any easier for Thomas' reasoning incredu- 
lity. 

This interview seems to have been granted with a 
special view to the restoration of the erring disciple ; for 
no sooner does Jesus appear and bestow his salutation, 
than singling him out, he addresses him. And how 
must the words of the Master have thrilled the soul 
of the doubter ! He hears the precise language of his 
own unbelief — that which he has been repeating to him- 
self day by day, and with which he has obstinately met 
the arguments and representations of his fellow-disciples. 
" Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and 
behold my hands ; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust 
it into my side ; and be not faithless, but believing." 

And now we have reached the point of our special 
inquiries. The most frequent impression with Bible 
readers appears to be, that upon this offer of our Saviour, 
Thomas proceeded to inspect and handle the person of 
the Master, and thereupon came to faith. Can this im- 
pression be correct ? It is scarcely possible. Our view 
of the procedure of our Saviour, so long as we retain 
this impression, is shallow and unworthy. Not after 
this fashion, assuredly, would the Saviour gratify and 



THE DOUBTER CONVINCED. 213 

honor the unreasonable and even wicked demands of his 
tempted disciple. 

Both the narrative itself, and the analogy of our Sav- 
iour's dealings elsewhere, suggest a different view. 

Two things in the narrative strongly imply that 
Thomas did not accept the proposal of Jesus, but was 
otherwise brought to faith. The first is the statement 
which Christ afterward makes. He says, " Thomas, be- 
cause thou hast seen me, thou hast believed." Here no 
further help to faith of an outward sort is recognized, 
than simply the visible presence of the Saviour. The 
second is the evidently instantaneous recognition by 
Thomas, at the very words of the Master, not only of 
the identity of Jesus and the reality of his Resurrection, 
but of his absolute Divinity. This seems utterly incon- 
sistent with the impression so commonly entertained.* 

From the teachings of the passage itself, we cannot 
but think that Thomas was brought to faith on this wise. 
Probably before this interview he had begun to see the 
unsuitableness of his demands, and secretly to regret 
that he had insisted on them. His relentings had been 
such as to bring him back to the company of his brethren. 
And now, in the presence of the Saviour, whom he finds 

* It is with surprise that we find Ellicott thus writing, " We mark 
with adoring wonder, how the personal test which the Apostle had re- 
quired, was now vouchsafed to him." And again, " With his hands on 
the sacred wounds, with evidence most distinct that He whom he was per- 
mitted to touch was man, the convinced disciple, in terms the most ex- 
plicit, declares him to be God." 

How much more satisfactory Bishop Hall — " I do not hear that when 
it came to the issue, Thomas employed his hands in this trial : his eyes 
were now sufficient assurance : the sense of his Master's omniscience, in this 
particular challenge of him, spared, perhaps, the labor of a further dis- 
quisition." 



214 HOURS AMONG THE GOSPELS. 

to have been conversant with his unbelieving thoughts, 
although uninformed of them from any human source ; 
whom he finds to have been reading his heart with om- 
niscient eye, and to have been sorrowfully watching over 
him in all his wayward and guilty course ; the conviction 
flashes on his soul, that it is, it can be, none other than 
his gracious Master, not only risen from the dead, but 
clothed with every attribute of Divinity. And prostrat- 
ing himself, he utters the cry of adoring faith, "My 
Lord, and my God !" 

The most striking analogy to the case of Thomas, is 
that afforded by Nathanael. And in that instance, be 
it observed, it is evidently the sudden and resistless con- 
viction of the omniscience of Jesus, which is followed by 
instant and implicit faith. 

Nathanael was disposed to doubt. When Philip an- 
nounces to him the happy tidings, " We have found him 
of whom Moses in the law and the prophets did write, 
Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph," Nathanael is all 
incredulous. He responds, " Can there any good thing 
come out of Nazareth ?" Yet going with his friend, he 
soon finds that Jesus has some correct idea of his char- 
acter. Jesus pronounces him " an Israelite indeed, in 
whom is no guile," and then, at the question of Na- 
thanael, " Whence knowest thou me ?" gives Nathanael 
to understand that he knows all things, that his omnis- 
cient eye had been watching him in the secret place of 
wrestling prayer under the fig-tree; whereupon Na- 
thanael exclaims, in the fulness of his unhesitating faith, 
" Rabbi, thou art the Son of God ; thou art the king of 
Israel." 

Jesus approves the faith of Thomas ; yet as it was a 



THE DOUBTER CONVINCED. 215 

faith which needed to be helped into exercise by the 
personal presence and address of Jesus, he disparages it 
in comparison with a more ready and unquestioning 
faith, which would not reject the testimony of others. 
"Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast be- 
lieved ; blessed are they that have not seen and yet have 
believed." 

Our Saviour's treatment of Thomas accords with the 
Divine dealings with men generally, in the province of 
spiritual matters. Those who entertain speculative 
doubts concerning religion, are not commonly brought 
to true faith, by having their arguments of unbelief gone 
over in detail and refuted. These are commonly left to 
stand in full force. Yet they no longer have power, or 
are even remembered, when the Spirit of God has made 
known the Divine adaptations of the gospel to the deep 
needs of the soul. These doubts all vanish of them- 
selves, like ghosts to their graves before the morning 
sun. 

We close these studies in the gospels, listening to the 
benediction of the Master upon those who " have not 
seen and yet have believed," a benediction freighted 
with encouragement to us, who live between his first 
and his second appearings, and who in reference to the 
past and the future can humbly say, " Whom not having 
seen we love ; in whom, though now we see him not, 
yet believing, we rejoice with joy unspeakable, and full 
of glory." 



H 15 4 82 H 






> 






*P* 










rP* ^ 



V s .*>* 



,4©* 













y. %/ 

! ; A 







' * 4? id", «T( 



1^ •*J«J% % rP* O - * - ~ 







jPv, '.: 



.: '*«,*' ."*' 



©*. *.To° A 










i0* 






> ^ A* 



W •'JBR' "**** "••i 



A 



s* -, 



lVA. 






^0* 





L** A 9 "'*/* 















v" .•j a ^L% q, 



*♦ .. 



^ * 










:• **^»* ' .'29BS:-. \/ .-^S^-. ' *«.,** ' .•• 






A Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process 

. : jv Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 

^ *«»•»* «T Treatment Date: July 2005 

h % /? SjK&rf* *++ ^ V **i PreservationTechnologies 

L •• ^ftt> mS&MjJ/ll* "^UrfV 6 j A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERvXnON 






V^ 1 



1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 



<* V 






•o 1 

»1 



"fa** 



r- *** 










^- ^ ^ *^wa % ^ *♦ Wb 













^ •• 



--- * 









»P*£ 



:- 









y 










I s * aV5« - * 



jlO •I*J»*. *> 



^ '•"• **■ 



* s ' 




V* .••^ 






* -<t v ^& • 



